The Clingendael Institute organised, together with the Trans European Policy Studies Association (TEPSA), an expert lunch workshop ‘From Broadening to Managing the Rule of Law Agenda’ in Brussels on Tuesday December 6.
The EU is currently attempting to get a better grip on the rule of law with various initiatives. The latest is the European Parliament’s proposal of a Union Pact for Democracy, the Rule of Law and Fundamental Rights. This expert discussion aimed at exploring a different, complementary, approach: the relevance of a management perspective related to multilevel capacity-building (national, network, and European levels). Central in the discussion were questions such as: i) does the EU actually have the management capacities and willingness to improve national rule of law institutions? ; ii) does the EU have the instruments to discuss the quality of the many national institutions that define the quality of rule of law in member states? ; iii) is the rule of law agenda failing where the Eurozone agenda is starting to succeed – and if so, why? ; iv) which national institutions need to be targeted? ; v) what role does this demand from the Commission and the European Parliament?
12.30: Light lunch and opening Jan Marinus Wiersma, Senior Visiting Research Fellow, the Clingendael Institute
12:35 – 12:45: Opening Remarks by The EU’s management deficit: from the internal market to the rule of law Adriaan Schout, Coordinator Europe, the Clingendael Institute, and Michiel Luining, Researcher, the Clingendael Institute
12:45 – 13.00: Feedback, comment and link to The European Pact for democracy, human rights and the rule of law by Sophie in ‘T Veld, Rapporteur on the EU Mechanism on Democracy, Rule of Law and Fundamental Rights Discussion Conclusions
13.45-14.00: Conclusions by Jan Marinus Wiersma, Senior Visiting Research Fellow, the Clingendael Institute
For more details and information, you can download the draft policy paper below. This paper has been discussed during the workshop.
During the last month, LIIA team was working on several kinds of different projects, including presentation of our newest publications. Two of them were: “Euro scepticism in Small EU Member States” as well as: “Coping with Complexity in the Euro-Atlantic Community and Beyond: Riga Conference Papers 2016”. This Riga Conference companion volume offers reflections on the complex developments and future of the broader Trans-Atlantic area. It focuses on four key themes: security in the Euro-Atlantic community and beyond, Russia-West relations, European order and economic sustainability, and the neighbourhood countries and beyond.
Institute held an International Forum of China and Central and Eastern European Countries Enhanced Connectivity for Common Advancement. Forum along with the Business Forum was one of the main side events of the 5th Meeting of China – Central and Eastern European Countries Heads of Governments that took place in Riga on 5 November 2016.
Now our researchers are focusing on upcoming event on January 18th: “Latvian Foreign and Security Policy Yearbook 2017” presentation and public discussion. More information will follow.
Follow us on our social media and look for the latest updates at www.liia.lv
Non-linear Military Challenge Right, November 2016
The West is at war. Not a war of the old sort, fought with the thunder of guns, but a new sort, fought with the rustle of money, the shrill mantras of propagandists, and the stealthy whispers of spies. Often described as a ‘hybrid war,’ a blend of the military and the political, it reflects both the way that war is changing in the modern world and Russia’s attempt to divide, demoralize and distract the West as it asserts its claim to be a great power with a sphere of influence in Ukraine and beyond. This study explores the two parallel forms of ‘non-linear warfare’ and provides recommendations as to how the West can best respond.
For more information visit the website of the IIR.
Veronika Bílková & Tamás Lattmann, The Use of Force Against the Islamic State, November 2016.
The emergence of the so-called Islamic State (IS) has given rise to various legal questions. This policy paper written by Veronika Bílková and Tamás Lattmann considers some of them. It discusses whether the IS is a state, and if not, what its legal nature is; whether the use of force against the IS by countries other than Syria and Iraq is lawful under international law; what the nature of the armed conflict(s) in which the IS is involved is, which rules apply to it (them) and what the status of the IS fighters is; as well as which crimes the IS has committed, and what the options for criminally prosecuting IS members for these crimes are.
You can download the publication from this link.
Veronika Bílková, No Revolution Has Taken Place: The Post 2015 Human Rights Foreign Policy of the Czech Republic, October 2016.
In 2015, two new conceptual documents were adopted in the Czech Republic – the general Concept of the Czech Republic´s Foreign Policy and the more specific Concept of Human Rights Promotion and Transition Cooperation. The adoption of the new conceptual documents was preceded by a lively public debate, and fears were expressed that the Czech Republic was at the brink of a revolution in its human rights foreign policy. This reflection by Veronika Bílková argues that no revolution has taken place in the human rights policy of the Czech Republic. This is so because in the policy, the elements of continuity clearly prevail over those of discontinuity.
You can download the publication from this link.
Tamás Lattmann, The Referendum on the Refugee Quotas in Hungary – Protection of Sovereignty or Much Ado about Nothing?, October 2016.
This analysis gives information about the October 2016 referendum on the refugee quotas in Hungary, and examines its possible effects in the near future.
You can download the publication from this link.
Berfin Nur Osso, Success or Failure? Assessment of the Readmission Agreement Between the EU and Turkey from the Legal and Political Perspectives, October 2016.
This discussion paper by Berfin Nur Osso focuses on an assessment of the readmission agreement between the EU and Turkey.
You can download the publication from this link.
Michal Šimečka & Benjamin Tallis, Czech Strategic Partnerships: A Practice in Need of a Vision, September 2016.
The concept of a strategic partnership is gaining prominence in Czech diplomatic practice, but its meaning and implications remain inadequately understood. This policy paper by Michal Šimečka and Benjamin Tallis seeks to redress the situation by unpacking the concept and building a framework for understanding strategic partnerships in the Czech context. It argues that while it is not necessary to construct a rigorous definition of the concept, more coherence and clarity is needed for strategic partnerships to serve as a meaningful instrument of Czech foreign policy.
You can download the publication from this link.
“Yearbook of European Integration 2016” will be published in December
The “Yearbook on European Integration 2016” will be published in December 2016, in times of multiple crises as well as growing Euroscepticism and populism in Europe. A special focus of this year’s edition will be on the exit of Great Britain from the EU and tendencies of re-nationalisation and also on the unprecedented challenge that is the current migration crisis. The yearly guest editorial is written by Simon Bulmer and William Paterson, members of the scientific directorate of the IEP, who analyse “Germany’s role in the handling of the European monetary and refugee crisis”.
Three questions – three answers: Constanze Aka on Deutsche Welle Ukraine
Constanze Aka, Project Manager at the Institute for European Politics (IEP), gave an interview to Deutsche Welle Ukraine. In the video clip, Constanze gives three answers to three questions about the resignation of Khatia Dekanoidze who served as Chief of the Ukrainian National Police until 16 November 2016.
The Illusionary Giant of German Politics: The AfD? (TruLies Blog by Timo Lochocki)
Despite the recent successes of the right wing populist Alternative for Germany (AfD), could it turn out to be but an illusionary giant? In his contribution to the TruLies Blog, Timo Lochocki names four reasons why the AfD’s polling might collapse over the next year. Lochocki sees striking vulnerabilities that might substantially decrease popular support until Germany’s federal election in September 2017.
On 17 and 18 November 2016 the 8th German-Nordic-Baltic Forum was held. It took place at the Institute of International Relations and Political Science and brought together over 40 participants from political and academic spheres from all three Baltic States as well as from Sweden, Finland, Denmark, Poland and Germany to investigate the topic „German, Nordic and Baltic Views on the Future of the EU: Common Challenges and Common Answers“.
On 10 November 2016, with our Portuguese partners Fundação Calouste Gulbenkian and Instituto Português de Relações Internacionais (IPRI-UNL), the 4th Germany-Portugal Forum was held.
In the beginning, Parliamentary State Secretary Brigitte Zypries from the Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Energy spoke about a digital European Single Market and the active resistance within the German public to the trade agreements CETA and TTIP. She represented Vice Chancellor Sigmar Gabriel, who has been invited to deliver an opening statement but was unable to attend the forum, due to illness. The Portuguese Foreign Minister Prof. Dr. Augusto Santos Silva reviewed the topics, such as trade agreements and employment from the Portuguese perspective with special focus on Industry 4.0. As representative of the Bank of Portugal, Prof. Dr. Elisa Ferreira emphasized the necessity of strengthening the Banking Union in order to stabilize the Economic and Monetary Union and to generate growth.
The 26th annual meeting of the German-Hungarian Forum took place in Budapest on 25-26 October 2016 and was hosted by the Andrássy University Budapest. Around 200 participants from politics, economy, science, civil society and media attended the conference. This year’s forum focused on German and Hungarian perspectives on European policy issues. Current topics and challenges facing the EU were debated in the high-ranking panels. The demographic development, its consequences for the labor market in Europa as well as the current political situation in the EU were open for discussion. The participants continued to work in the following groups: “Competitiveness of Europe: New Ways and Concepts – Corporate potential” (WG Economics) and “The EU-Turkey Relations Mirrored in the German and Hungarian Media” (WG Media).
8th German-Nordic-Baltic Forum “German, Nordic and Baltic Views on the Futureof the EU: Common Challenges and Common Answers”
Date 17-18 November 2016, venue Institute of International Relations and Political Science of Vilnius University, Vilnius
On 17 and 18 November 2016 Institute of International Relations and Political Science of Vilnius University (IIRPS VU) together with the Institut für Europäische Politik (IEP) co-organised the 8th German-Nordic-Baltic Forum in Vilnius, Lithuania. More than 40 participants from Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Sweden, Finland, Denmark, Poland and Germany came together to discuss the common policies of these countries.
One of the aims was to discuss current pressing issues and questions related to the EU and the future integration process within different panels. The main focus of the debate was solutions and possible reforms in the migration- and asylum policy, possibility for a German-Baltic compromise regarding energy policy and energy security, security policy and relations with Russia as well as challenges and strategies for the future of the EU, particularly after the British referendum on the Brexit.
The German-Nordic-Baltic Forum was created with the cooperation and support of Germany’s Federal Foreign Office in 2008. The aim of this annual multilateral dialogue is to debate prevailing topics of EU politics from the individual national perspectives and to elaborate on the potentials for joint strategies.
Ed. by Karlis Bukovskis. “Euroscepticism in Small EU Member States”. Riga: Latvian Institute of International Affairs, 2016. – 160 p.
The book “Euroscepticism in Small EU Member States” is an effort by an international team of analysts to address the Euroscepticism phenomenon in small European Union Member States. It draws the general conclusions that the observed small countries of different enlargement periods, namely, Luxembourg, Ireland, Portugal, Finland, Latvia, Bulgaria and Croatia, are realists in terms of reckoning the political and economic gains from the membership and future amendments of the EU policies. Although Eurosceptic ideas are not unfamiliar in any of the countries, calls for exiting the European Union are marginalized. The book is the result of successful collaboration between the Latvian Institute of International Affairs and the Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung.
Ed. by Andris Sprūds, Diāna Potjomkina. “Coping with Complexity in the Euro-Atlantic Community and Beyond: Rīga Conference Papers 2016”. Riga: Latvian Institute of International Affairs, 2016. – 276 p.
This Riga Conference companion volume offers reflections on the complex developments and future of the broader Trans-Atlantic area. It focuses on four key themes: security in the Euro-Atlantic community and beyond, Russia-West relations, European order and economic sustainability, and the neighborhood countries and beyond. This project is managed by the Latvian Institute of International Affairs, supported by the Latvian Ministry of Foreign Affairs and NATO Public Diplomacy Division, and carried out in cooperation with the Latvian Transatlantic Organization. The Rīga Conference is organized jointly by the Latvian Transatlantic Organization, the Ministry of Defence of the Republic of Latvia, and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Latvia.
Ed. By Andris Sprūds, Diāna Potjomkina, Valters Ščerbinskis. “Latvia’s Foreign Policy Centenary: Ideas and Personalities” In 2016, in the framework of the project Latvia’s foreign policy centenary the Latvian Institute of International Affairs created the first of the three planned book volumes – it is dedicated to the key ideas and personalities in the hundred years of independent Latvia’s foreign policy. This book, integrating a broad outlook on the development of Latvia’s foreign policy ideas with a review of key personalities, is the first such volume in Latvia.
Trilogy comprised by this first volume as well as planned volumes on key centenary events (2017) and modern Latvia’s foreign policy (2018) will strengthen knowledge and understanding on Latvia in the international environment, showing broader tendencies and demonstrating links between various periods in the development of Latvia’s foreign policy thinking.
Ed. by Māris Andžāns, Ilvija Bruģe. “The Baltic Sea Region: Hard and Soft Security Reconsidered”. Rīga: Latvian Institute of International Affairs, 2016. – 208 p.
The Baltic Sea region has experienced profound alterations since the Cold War, and the region’s course of evolution is likely to continue as such. The book “The Baltic Sea Region: Hard and Soft Security Reconsidered” provides a collection of opinions that assess the current situation both in the military as well as non-military fields, with a particular focus on the aftermath of the 2016 NATO Warsaw summit and the state of the play of the regional infrastructure interconnections. The book is the result of successful collaboration between the Latvian Institute of International Affairs, the Public Diplomacy Division of NATO, the Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung and the Nordic Council of Ministers.
The book consists of collection of opinions by various authors from different countries and diverse research backgrounds to provide a multi-faceted review of the development of unmanned ground systems (UGS) in military use from different perspectives – to cover both the retrospective and prospective development of UGS as well as the current issues and challenges from military, technical and legal perspectives.
In the book, a range of authors provide a multi-faceted review of the development of unmanned ground systems from different perspectives – to cover both the retrospective and prospective development of such systems, as well as the current issues and challenges from military, technical and legal perspectives.
Public discussion: “Eastern Partnership One Year After Riga: Where Next? Insights from Latvia, Georgia, Moldova, and Ukraine”, September 21, Riga Graduate School of Law.
The Riga Eastern Partnership summit that took place more than one year ago reconfirmed the importance of the Eastern Partnership as an initiative for closer engagement between the European Union and Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Moldova, and Ukraine and for supporting reforms in the partner countries. It also introduced several important novelties, such as greater differentiation in the EU’s approach to the six neighbours and strengthening security dialogue.
In preparation for the next Eastern Partnership summit scheduled for 2017, it was a good time to start the discussion on relevant topics.
Public lecture by Dr. Daniel Hamilton: “The State of Transatlantic Relations and the Possible Impact of US Presidential Elections”, September 22, The Stockholm School of Economics.
US foreign policy is about to witness a significant change as President Obama’s term expires in the late fall this year. The arrival of a newly elected President will most probably have a considerable impact on US attitude towards Transatlantic cooperation both in economic and security matters, with the latter being particularly important for the Baltic States. Through this lecture, Dr. Hamilton was focusing on chances of the candidates and implications of their victories for Transatlantic and European economic and security agenda.
The video is also available.
Launch of publication “Euro scepticism in Small EU Member States”, October 6, the EU House.
A series of possible breaking points that destabilize the European house have emerged: the economic imbalances, the questioning of common European values, even the suspension of the rule of law and, not least, rising nationalism. The main event questions were – How Latvia sees the future after twelve years of EU membership? What mood is observed in other small EU Member States? And is there a reason to talk about the collapse of the EU?
Discussion: “The Baltic States – An Energy Island or Energy Peninsula in the European Union?”, October 17, Hotel Bergs )
Since the reestablishment of their independence, the Baltic States have been seen as an energy island in the EU. We were looking for answers to a list of questions. How can the current progress in connecting the energy grids assessed? Do the connections with Finland, Sweden and Poland provide the minimum necessary power amount, and what should be the further development perspectives? How could the future natural gas markets and infrastructure evolve given the already existing LNG terminal and issues with the market liberalization?
The video is also available.
A Think Tank International Forum of China and Central and Eastern European Countries, one of the side events of the 5th Meeting of China – Central and Eastern European Countries Heads of Governments, November 4, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Latvia.
The presentation of the first volume – “Latvia’s Foreign Policy Centenary: Ideas and Personalities” – and the public discussion “Modern Latvia’s Meierovici? The Key Ideas and Personalities in Latvia’s Foreign Policy” took a place on November 17, 2016. In 2016, in the framework of the project Latvia’s Foreign Policy Centenary the Latvian Institute of International Affairs created the first of the three planned book volumes – it is dedicated to the key ideas and personalities in the hundred years of independent Latvia’s foreign policy. This book, integrating a broad outlook on the development of Latvia’s foreign policy ideas with a review of key personalities, is the first such volume in Latvia.
Trilogy comprised by this first volume as well as planned volumes on key centenary events (2017) and modern Latvia’s foreign policy (2018) will strengthen knowledge and understanding on Latvia in the international environment, showing broader tendencies and demonstrating links between various periods in the development of Latvia’s foreign policy thinking.
The video is also available.
Public discussion and presentation of the book “The Baltic Sea Region: Hard and Soft Security Reconsidered”, November 22, Hotel Bergs
The Baltic Sea region has experienced profound alterations since the Cold War, and the region’s course of evolution is likely to continue as such. The book “The Baltic Sea Region: Hard and Soft Security Reconsidered” provides a collection of opinions that assess the current situation both in the military as well as non-military fields, with a particular focus on the aftermath of the 2016 NATO Warsaw summit and the state of the play of the regional infrastructure interconnections.
The video is also available.
Philippe de Schoutheete’s life and work document a historical period – significant for the integration process of Europe overall. More than just by his skills as diplomat he was also a model for the intensive and productive cooperation between those with practical responsibilities for EU policies and politics, and us in the ivory tower, responsible for proper academic research and teaching. As a bridge between practitioners and scientists, he was active in many joint ventures, such as Theseus – Establishing a European Society, or the Jean Monnet Project SUMMIT. He was always open for discussions with several generations of EU scholars.
Philippe de Schoutheete contributed with seminal articles to the reality focused research on the early European Community. Only recently, he still published ‘La création de l’Euro’ (2016). One of his foci was however the Political Cooperation, e.g. with ‘La coopération politique européenne’ (1980). As co-editor of the volume ‘Foreign Policy of the European Union: From EPC to CFSP and Beyond’ Philippe de Schoutheete was a highly esteemed and generous colleague.
A second focus of Philippe de Schoutheete was the European Council, on which he published ‘The European Council’ (2002, with H Wallace) and ‘The European Council’ (in J Peterson and M. Schackleton: ‘The institutions of the European Union’, lastly 2012). As for his knowledge on this key institution, it was logical that he became Member of our SUMMIT Advisory Board and supported our work with his excellent analyses, his thoughtful and to the point comments at conferences and helpful input whenever needed. We thank him sincerely for his kind, continuous encouragement and will remember his gentlemanlike friendliness.
Baron Philippe de Schoutheete (1932-2016) was ambassador in Madrid, political director at the Belgian Foreign Ministry and Belgium’s permanent representative to the European Union from 1987 to 1997. He was special adviser to Commissioner Michel Barnier and has been Guest Professor at the University of Louvain and at the College of Europe Natolin (Poland) as well as Senior Fellow of the European Department of Egmont Institute (Royal Institute for International Relations).
2-15 February 2016, Botswana and Namibia – field research in Africa
Judit Kiss and Zsuzsánna Biedermann visited different institutes and met governmental officiers, as well as local researchers to map the dangers and chances of raw material economy
22-23 February 2016, Budapest – Budapest Business School Faculty of International Management and Business Campus
Ágnes Szunomár, Tamás Novák, Miklós Szanyi took part and gave lectures at the Conference on the Current Issues of Economic and Social Integration in Hungary and Taiwan.
23 February 2016, Budapest – Europe Club
Speaker: Joseph P. Forgacs, DPhil, DSc. (Oxford) Scientia Professor, University of New South Wales, Sydney
29 February 2016, Washington – Center for Strategic & International Studies
András Deák was a participant and had a lecture at the conference Understanding Russian Influence in Europe.
7 March 2016, Budapest – Headquarters of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences
10 March 2016, Budapest – within the frames of the IWE CERS HAS series ‘Economics with policy’ Oleg Buklemishev held a seminar under the title Investment pause in the Russian economy and how to overcome it.
22 March 2016, Budapest – Europe Club
Péter Heil expert in development policy, Corvinus University, associate professor: Change, money – New planning period in the EU’s development policy
22 March 2016, Warsaw – Polish Institute of International Affairs
Ágnes Szunomár represented the institute at the closing event of “V4 Goes Global: Exploring opportunities in V4 cooperation with BASIC emerging powers”
Title of the book containing the reseach studies: V4 Goes Global. Exploring Opportunities and Obstacles for Visegrad Countries Cooperation with Brazil, India, China and South Africa.
April 14 2016, Budapest – IWE CERS HAS
Within the frames of our institute’s workshop talk series Tamás Gerőcs junior research fellow was focusing on the Chinese currency. He drawed two models of internationalization of the yuan. Either a more hegemonic role in the international financial system when the yuan could compete with the dollar to become the leading unit of account in trade, reserve and investment functions of a world currency. Or the other model which suggests a partial or ‘basic’ convertibility with modest international function of the yuan. It could become an anchor currency in the intra-Asian trade.
April 14-16 2016, Philadelphia, by the Council for European Studies
Tamás Novák in his paper ‘Austerity – Selective Austerity – Non-Austerity: Experiences of Central European EU Members States’ attempted to explore the conclusions that can be drawn from the divergent strategies of Central European EU member countries as regards austerity measures or alternative approaches to such measures.
April 19 2016, Budapest – Europe Club
György Raskó agrarian economist: Comparative analysis of agricultural development in the EU and in Hungary, with special emphasis on the efficiency of production
The 14th edition of the IEP paperback classic “Europa von A bis Z” (in German) edited by Prof. Dr. Werner Weidenfeld and Prof. Dr. Wolfgang Wessels has been published. In over 70 contributions European experts explain on a sound academic basis all the important topics and terms from the politics, economy, and history of European unification. The articles include topics such as asylum and migration policy, Brexit, Euroscepticism and differentiated integration, and provide background information as well as reading suggestions and links.
In the new issue of integration, Christian Rauh and Michael Zürn describe the politicization of the European Union and its potential to create a more democratic path of European integration. Oliver Höing illustrates the constraints of the European Stability Mechanism concerning the stabilization of the Euro zone. Ludwig Gramlich and Claudia Conen discuss new alternative solutions for the procedure of investor-state dispute settlement. Elmar Brok elaborates four megatrends and self-made problems as greatest threats to the existence of the European Union. Marius Michalski’s collective review discusses works on the European parliamentary election of 2014 and a further one by Christoph Schewe textbooks on European Union law. The ‘Arbeitskreis Europäische Integration’ reports on conferences about politicization and Europeanization as well as federal perspectives in the ongoing EU reform debate and on the ceremonial act in honour of Professor Dr. Dr. h.c. mult Peter-Christian Müller-Graff.
The analysis of the relation between citizens and politics is mostly conducted from two different perspectives and disciplines: On the one hand, legislative scholars analyse legislative behaviour or evaluate representation in terms of responsiveness or congruence. On the other hand, public opinion research focuses mainly on analyses of political trust or satisfaction with democracy for assessing citizens’ perspective. To a minor degree, both disciplines are combined: In the last decades, legislative research neglected the perspective of citizens, and public opinion research referred only rarely to theories that concern representation at its core. This article aims at closing this r
esearch gap and addresses citizens’ evaluation of representation. It investigates the effects of congruence – as the main indicator for judging about the quality of representation – from a micro-perspective while referring to the underlying assumption: The higher the congruence, the better the quality of representation. It (1) develops new models for conceptualizing congruence on the micro-level, (2) analyses how citizens assess parliamentary representation in terms of perceived responsiveness and (3) explores how different concepts of congruence impact on it. The analysis is drawn for the EU countries. The results indicate that the distinct conceptualizations of congruence are of varying importance for explaining citizens’ representational judgments.
As the European Union struggled to address an unprecedented influx of refugees in 2015, four Eastern European governments rejected a proposal for European Union refugee quotas. Within each country, however, there are different views on the migrant crisis and immigration in general that are overshadowed by this uniform policy response. My research on the political divisions in each country explains that these differences are related to how political camps developed after communism. Through an analysis of the causes of immigration salience and the reasons behind immigration and integration policy positions of various parties in Eastern European countries, this research finds that which party – left or right – adopts more socially liberal policy positions depends on its relationships to communist federalism and the most politically notable ethnic group in the country. My work finds three distinct political patterns in Eastern Europe.
Reforms affecting the independence of courts and the media in Hungary and Poland have received significant attention in recent months. But to what extent do these developments constitute a genuine shift in the nature of Hungarian and Polish politics? Jan Rovny writes that while both countries have witnessed a rise in support for parties with anti-democratic tendencies, the dynamics of party competition remain consistent with the liberal-conservative political divide that has characterised the politics of these countries since the fall of communism. [First lines]
In French: La gravité et la multidimensionnalité des crises que connaît l’UE imposent un questionnement sérieux. Comment les sciences sociales peuvent-elle analyser le désenchantement vis-à-vis de la construction européenne ? Faut-il voir dans les incertitudes de l’actualité une occasion unique de rendre les études européennes plus scientifiques et objectives ? Pour son 50e numéro, la revue s’efforce de regarder au-delà de la science politique de langue française.
In Italian : Con il presente documento, presentato in vista delle elezioni comunali che si svolgeranno a Roma nel 2016, l’Associazione 21 luglio vuole proporre alle forze politiche e ai candidati a cariche elettive i principi essenziali per mutare radicalmente le politiche verso gli abitanti delle baraccopoli e dei micro insediamenti presenti nella Capitale. Le azioni previste nel documento hanno come obiettivo, nell’arco temporale di 5 anni: la chiusura graduale e progressiva delle baraccopoli e dei micro insediamenti della Capitale e il superamento dei centri di raccolta dove sono concentrate le famiglie vittime degli sgomberi che nel passato hanno coinvolto abitanti di numerose baraccopoli. “Roma: oltre le baraccopoli” si avvale degli studi condotti dall’Associazione 21 luglio e, nell’ultima parte, del prezioso apporto del prof. Tommaso Vitale, Sciences Po (Université Sorbonne Paris Cité)1. Il testo condivide medesimi principi e metodi riportati all’interno della “Delibera di iniziativa popolare per il superamento dei campi rom”, promossa da nove associazioni2 e sottoscritta da oltre 6.000 cittadini, depositata in Campidoglio l’11 settembre 2015.
1st lines: It is a privilege to be read and discussed by such insightful scholars, several of which have made important contributions to our understanding of industry-government relations and financial regulation in recent history. Their reading of my own analysis has given me a much sharper sense of my argument. Indeed, I agree with many of their comments, including some of the critical ones, and believe our discussion contributes positively to the still on-going political analysis of the recent global crisis. The reviews all thoroughly engage with the political analysis and the empirical discussion of the bank bailout schemes presented in the book. Their main thrust differs, however, and it is helpful to organize my response by grouping them according to the focus of their criticism. This allows me to clarify three subjects in my rejoinder to the following discussion: the nature of power, the use of the chicken-game metaphor and the role of healthy banks in different countries.
In order to respond to the insightful and detailed discussion, I find it helpful to group the authors according to the most relevant issues they have identified. First, I will return to the notion of power in business-government relations, which Wilmarth and Barnes discuss at length and which Reinke finds problematic. Second, I will clarify the use of the game-theoretical framing, which has certain heuristic limitations. It does, however, address the governments’ strategy, contrary to the criticism of Reinke and Jensen. Third, I dive into the empirical study to address other factors that help to explain bailout arrangements. I show why I disagree firmly with Jensen, who believes that healthy banks alone are sufficient to analyze the six cases, suggesting that my argument is over-determined. I do concede, however, that additional elements help to provide a richer analysis, in particular the institutional and legal settings highlighted by Moutot and Thiemann.
For more than 50 years, European integration has been called a success story built up around the narrative of an ‘ever closer Union’. Since the financial and economic crisis, however, a serious concern of disintegration has been striking the European Union. Possible scenarios range from a collapse of the EU system to fragmentation, differentiation, and partial disintegration. Exit schemes like Grexit and Brexit are openly discussed, tendencies of renationalisation arise. External pressures reinforce this trend. In view of these manifold challenges, how might Europe’s future look like?
The THESEUS conference dealt with a reflection on the past and current crises taking place in and around Europe, and discussed if and how those have been working as catalysts for further institutional, economic or political integration or caused steps of disintegration. It discussed a set of theoretical understandings, concepts, and definitions of the disintegration phenomenon itself as well as possible causalities and interplays between integrative and disintegrative processes.
More than 100 international academics, politicians, young researchers, and the interested public discussed past and possible future developments of European integration and disintegration processes at the Fritz Thyssen Foundation in Cologne. They found that challenges at hand ask for new political and scientific approaches – leaving some speakers more optimistic than others regarding the EU’s future.
“In EU politics, we have been involved in a lot of subjects, but probably reflected too little on possible crises and adequate reactions to them”, stated Chairholder Wolfgang Wessels, University of Cologne, in his opening remarks. He described the conference as a floor to reflect crises like a possible ‘Brexit’ or ‘Grexit’, tendencies of renationalization and the success of anti-EU parties or the refugee movement towards Europe to better understand such challenges and contribute to an envisaged peaceful future European cooperation.
Defining the often randomly used term ‘crisis’ was a first step to do so. Hartmut Kaelble, Humboldt-University Berlin, distinguished between five types of crises and positioned the EU in the second most challengeable: a crisis in which both governments and the public are involved. “We are thus not in the worst position contrasting to times after the Second World War in which we faced a system crisis”, concluded the Historian.
Johannes Pollak, Institute for Advanced Studies, stated that the EU has always been about crisis management and that it is even crucial for readjustments to its set-up. The tricky element though was that external developments such as conflicts in Syria or Ukraine affected the EU making it more difficult for the Union to react than to internal conflicts only.
Gaby Umbach, European University Institute, illustrated a two-fold picture: On the one hand the EU facing manifold fields of conflicts around EU politics and on the other hand the – despite growing radicalisation among a minority group – relatively positive perception of EU citizens towards the EU environment. She called for the often raised necessity of improved citizen-involvement to solve the conflictual situation at hand ending with a quite optimistic picture.
Talking about institutional characteristics of EU crisis management, the panellists stressed a rising importance of intergovernmental decision-making among heads of state or government. This in turn circumvented political debate probably resulting in “more efficiency vis-à-vis less legitimacy” as Christine Neuhold, Maastricht University, questioned when showing the rising number of Trilogues, in which a limited group of representatives of European Commission, Council, and European Parliament arrive at political solutions.
Jörg Monar, College of Europe, spoke of shrinking impact of European Parliament and Council – despite more competences following the Lisbon Treaty (2007) – due to ‘last-minute decision-making’. Olivier Rozenberg, Sciences Po Paris, presented a recent study depicting shrinking numbers of legislation and Philippe de Schoutheete, Egmont Royal Institute for International Relations, illustrated the trend towards informal meetings by the example of talks on the maintenance of the Eurozone.
How crucial a higher attention for developments beyond EU borders and a more active engagement of the EU in solving conflicts in Syria, Libya or between Russia and Ukraine was, stressed for instance Atila Eralp, Middle East Technical University, or Christopher Hill, University of Cambridge. Eralp stated the high potential of the EU in creating partnerships. He called for a more consistent position in EU-Turkey relations. Hill reminded the audience of the ‘mistake’ to address domestic and foreign policy separately.
With regards to possible exits of EU member states resulting from the many facets of challenges surrounding EU politics, Brigid Laffan, European University Institute, warned of domino effects, in which further countries might follow for instance the exit candidate United Kingdom (UK). She moreover addressed exit consequences regarding a new power balance in the EU, in case UK as “critical counter balance” left the Union.
Funda Tekin, Institut für Europäische Politik and Centre international de formation européenne, illustrated that exits on the other hand might also lead to more integration in terms of a ‘core Europe’ and Frank Schimmelfennig, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, presented differentiated integration as a tool for an ‘ever closer Union’.
The official part of the conference was closed with the concluding remarks of THESEUS Chairperson Wolfgang Wessels, University of Cologne, and Iain Begg, London School of Economics and Political Science. Both interpreted the topics on the conference agenda as a sign for the need to actively address problems at hand before action was too late, and to redefine theoretical models of European integration to better address processes of differentiation and disintegration. Wessels furthermore stressed the importance for a continuation of research and teaching to improve the understanding of EU politics and a potential engagement.
Against the background of the current crisis situation keynote speaker Rita Süssmuth, former President of the German Bundestag, appealed repeatedly: “We must communicate much more”, looking back at many years of involvement in exchange with national and EU political actors. “Today’s politicians need to pay more attention the values and benefits of our community as has been done by heads of state or government in the Union’s earlier years”. She supported the course of Chancellor Angela Merkel in the refugee movement towards Europe – one of the EU’s most pressing ‘crises’. “No quick solution is at reach – therefore it’s best to say we work on it”. Central elements of that work are engagements in shrinking the percentage of unemployment and social exclusion, argued Süssmuth.
After her speech, the THESEUS Awards were remitted. Joseph Weiler, President of the prestigious European University Institute in Florence, received the THESEUS Outstanding Award for his many years of outstanding engagement in European integration research. The THESEUS Promising Award went to the two junior scientists Leonhard den Hertog, Centre for European Policy Studies in Brussels, and Martin Mendelski, University of Trier.
On 15 February an international high level conference “The European Union: Imprint of the Latvian Presidency” took place at the Latvian Parliament (Saeima). The event was organised by LIIA and supported by Representation of the European Commission in Latvia, Parliament of the Republic of Latvia and the European Parliament Information Office in Latvia.
The aim of the conference was to provide an expert assessment and a discussion about the current political, economic and security challenges of the European Union, as well as the opportunities Latvia and the organization as a whole has. Concerns over economic problems of the European Union have been replaced by discussions about the refugee crisis, border security, Brexit, rise of political radicalism in the EU member states, as well as the future global role of the EU. During the three afternoon breakout sessions the participants discussed in greater detail the situation in the EU Neighbourhood, economic aspects of the Single Digital Market and the potential of the EU Energy Union.
The conference gathered high-level policy makers, among them Valdis Dombrovskis (Vice-President of the European Commission), Jan Vapaavuori (Vice-President of the European Investment Bank) Members of the European Parliament and Saeima, the representatives of the European Commission, and distinguished experts from the EU, including Latvia.
The EU and its member states have been completely overtaken by the refugee crisis, more particularly in view of the numbers of migrants and the intensity of the process. We were not sufficiently prepared. Whether we could have foreseen the crisis, is another question.
In theory suitable instruments were available to counter the crisis. In view of the ‘single human space’ (the de facto borderless Schengen area) created after setting up the single market, the accomplishment of some important tasks should have been ensured at the EU external borders: the registration of the claims for asylum or other forms of protection, the identification of the applicants and the examination of the individual applications. Also the return of irregular migrants to their country of origin should have been prepared at our external borders. In this whole process fast procedures should have been applied.
In practice, however, our external borders appeared to be permeable. The weak role of Frontex is certainly an element in this discussion. However, at the time this agency was founded, member states did not want to have a strong European organisation responsible to exercise, as it were autonomously, controls at the external EU borders. On the contrary, member states preferred an organisation with a mandate to merely ‘assist’ them, upon their request. As it turned out, during the crisis individual member states started to develop their own approaches, varying from respectively allowing immediate passage, showing hospitality and openness, to the closing of borders and the construction of fences. Consequently, disorder arose and migrants evidently chose to travel (only) to those member states with an open attitude towards them. In short, a result completely contrary to the principles of solidarity and burden sharing. An approach also far from the common solutions which were so desperately needed.
Who is to blame for the situation that has occurred? Certainly not the European Union or, more particularly, the Commission. Indeed, the Commission has always monitored the situation carefully and tabled suitable proposals to counter the situation. Therefore, the member states are rather to blame. Either they did not implement obligations they had accepted in an earlier stage, or they were not willing to be engaged in a process of solidarity leading to common solutions. Is Europe lacking visionary politicians these days?
What should happen now? As much as possible, we have to try to transform the present chaotic situation into the one which should have been envisaged right from the start of the crisis. That means fast procedures for the registration, identification and examination of the applications for asylum. In view of the huge number of migrants a fair system of relocation across the member states cannot be avoided, also an effective system to return irregular migrants to their country of origin is needed. A supplementary measure could be to implement the ‘humanitarian admission scheme’ with Turkey. According to that scheme, a reduction of irregular inflows into Europe will be coupled with a (voluntary) admission in Europe of (primarily Syrian) migrants who were received in Turkey but are in need of protection. Another idea could be to ‘internationalise’ the problem, and to invite other ‘safe’ third countries to take their responsibility in the crisis and to accept a number of migrants in their respective countries. It is by the way surprising that this question has not been put more explicitly on the international agenda.
At the end of 2015, the Commission presented its proposal regarding the establishment of a European Border and Coast Guard: a good proposal aiming to secure control over the EU’s external borders in the Mediterranean. Indeed, everybody understands that a common, European, organisation is needed to fulfil such a complicated task in difficult and, even, dangerous times. In the given circumstances, the full responsibility to control these borders cannot be left any longer to those member states geographically located in the territory where these borders are drawn. The European Council of 18 February has called for an acceleration of the work with a view to reaching political agreement under the Dutch Presidency. Let’s hope that the competent ministers will do everything possible to restore an effective – and common – Schengen system well before the Dutch Presidency ends.
Prof. Jaap de Zwaan, TEPSA Secretary-General
Uroš Svete, Damijan Guštin, Janja Vuga, Rok Zupančič, Jelena Juvan, The Small State Facing Asymmetric Environment: A Reconsideration of the Identity? – The Slovenian Experience, Institute of International Relations, Prague, ISBN 978-80-87558-24-9.
The book The Small State Facing Asymmetric Environment: A Reconsideration of the Identity? – The Slovenian Experience, which was co-authored by our Associate Research Fellow Rok Zupančič and published by the IIR publishing house, analyses asymmetry in warfare from the perspective of a small nation by combining a historical, a defence-strategic and also a wider security approach, including certain moral-legal and technological dimensions. Its primary objective is to prove that small countries, “often endowed” with rich historical experience, can also significantly contribute to discussions of asymmetric warfare and understandings of conflicts. It thus aims to fill a gap in the field, as similar studies in the field mostly focus on powerful states. The book mainly focuses on Slovenian asymmetric experiences, as Slovenia went through a series of dramatic alterations in the last 60 years. The Slovenes were forced to use an asymmetric approach during the Second World War, but today Slovenia is a part of both NATO and the EU alliance. And thus it is increasingly faced with situations where an asymmetric approach is used against it (especially in Afghanistan). The book also analyses how the still present and strong historical memories of asymmetric warfare cause almost schizophrenic political and social reactions and a huge identity crisis in Slovenia. The authors argue that in Slovenia the division within the nation, which has escalated in World War II and the years that followed, is still present nowadays, and the planned reconciliation of the nation has not happened yet.
Petr Kratochvíl, Věra Řiháčková, Domestic political context since 1989: Russia as a dividing element in Czech society, Jacek Kucharczyk and Grigorij Mesežnikov (eds.), Commissioned by the Heinrich-Böll-Stiftung offices in Prague and Warsaw, Warsaw, 2015, ISBN: 978-80-906270-2-4 (Heinrich-Böll-Stiftung Prague, Opatovická 28, Praha 1, 110 00, Czech Republic).
In “Diverging Voices, Converging Policies: The Visegrad States’ Reactions to the Russia-Ukraine Conflict”
In order to explain the differing reactions of individual Visegrad countries to the Russia-Ukraine Conflict, the offices of the Heinrich-Böll-Stiftung in Prague and Warsaw asked their partner organizations to systematically analyze how these countries have dealt with the Russia-Ukraine conflict. The result is the report “Diverging Voices, Converging Policies: The Visegrad States’ Reactions to the Russia-Ukraine Conflict”. Particular consideration was to be given to the differing historical experiences, public opinions, economic relations, and energy and foreign policies of the Visegrad countries. Our Director Petr Kratochvíl co-authored (together with Věra Říháčková) one of the contributions to this report.
Lukáš Tichý, The EU Integration Discourse in the Energy Relations with Russia, Slovak Journal of Political Sciences. Volume 16, Issue 1, Pages 60–85, ISSN (Online) 1335-9096, DOI: 10.1515/sjps-2016-0004, January 2016.
The energy issue has long been one of the most discussed and controversial topics in relations between the European Union and the Russian Federation. The intention of the present article is to provide an attempt to overcome the largely non-discursive way of looking at the energy interaction of the EU and the RF, a view which is also anchored in the security conditions, and to analyze EU energy relations with Russia in the years 2004 – 2014 through an integration discourse. On the theoretical level, the article is based on a critical constructivism, which in relation to the discourse as the main concept reflects a number of fundamental knowledge. At the methodological level, the article is based on discourse analysis as a basic methodological tool through which the author examines the EU text documents.
Michal Kořan et al., V4 Trust – the Czech Presidency of the Visegrad Group (2015–2016), The Think Visegrad – V4 Think Tank Platform, International Visegrad Fund, February 2016.
The V4 Presidency Mid-Term Review Report assesses the first half of the Czech V4 presidency and suggests key recommendations for the remaining time of the presidency. The assessment is based on the Presidency’s own priorities, but also on the overall context in which the Presidency is taking place. The report is based on individual opinions of its authors and also, partly, on existing analyses provided by Think Visegrad throughout the year 2015.
24 February 2015, Club Europe, Budapest
The meeting was chaired by Péter Balázs, former European Commissioner and Minister of Foreign Affairs, and the speaker was the well-known expert and professor of the topic, Zoltán Sz. Bíró (in Hungarian).
20 February 2015, New Orleans
At the conference organised by the International Studies Association (ISA) senior researcher Tamás Novák gives a lecture on the effects of the TTIP on the Eastern European region.
16 February 2015, Centre for Economic and Regional Studies, Budapest
Joint workshop on the different aspects of convergence and catching up by the Central European region, with researchers from the three member institutes of the KRTK research centre, namely senior researchers Gábor Oblath, Zoltán Gál, Krisztina Vida, Margit Rácz and director Károly Fazekas
12 February 2015, IWE Budapest
Lecture by academician prof. Mihály Simai about the recent World Economic Forum Annual Meeting in Davos and its consequences for Hungary (in Hungarian)
9 February 2015, Universidad Tecnologia de Monterrey, Mexico City
Prof. András Inotai’s speech on “The EU at the crossroads” in Spanish language
5 February 2015, Budapest
At the February event senior researcher András Deák presented the topic of energy relations between Russia and the EU, Russia’s energy potential, its export capacities, physical infrastructure and economic interests – followed by a lively debate (in Hungarian)
3 February 2015, Radisson Hotel, Budapest
Prof. András Inotai participated at the conference ofthe Hungarian-Bulgarian Chamber of Commerce entitled “United Arab Emirates (RAKIA) Road Show” focusing on the topic “Eastern opportunities – efficient business management and taxation”
29 January 2015, European Representation, Budapest
Research director Margit Rácz gave a lecture at the “Europe Direct” meeting on growth and employment perspectives in the EU as well as on the current state and challenges of EMU (in Hungarian)
29 January 2015, Masaryk University Brno
Senior researcher András Deák made a presentation on “Diversity of gas supplies as a key precondition for the effective V4 gas market” at the IVF Think Tank Platform in Brno
28 January 2015, DGAP Berlin
Senior researcher András Deák contributed to the DGAP workshop with a lecture on: “Energie- und Energieaußenpolitik Ungarns vor dem Hintergrund der Spannungen zwischen der EU und Russland”
22 January 2015, Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Budapest
Round table conference with different research institutes on the role of think-tanks in Hungary – at the occasion of the publication of the report by the University of Pennsylvania on the “Global Go To Think Tank Index” (GGTTI) where IWE is the 39th among the 50 listed economic policy think-tanks in the world. At this conference IWE was represented by vice-director Miklós Szanyi.
20 January 2015, Club Europe, Budapest
Lecture given by Erzsébet Nagy, former Ambassador of Hungary to the Swiss Federation (in Hungarian)
8 January 2015, Budapest
At the January event vice-director of IWE, Miklós Szanyi gave an introductory lecture on the vast topic of the increased role of states in the national economy after the crisis first from a theoretical perspective and then on the example of Hungary – followed by a lively debate (in Hungarian).
On 22 and 23 January 2015, the Institut für Europäische Politik (IEP) and the Istituto Affari Internazionali (IAI) conducted the German-Italian Dialogue at the Residenza di Ripetta in Rome. Under the title “Germany and Italy – Partners in Constructing Europe”, 200 participants from Italy and Germany discussed the role of the European Union, specifically Germany and Italy, in overcoming the current challenges in the areas of economy, energy policy and foreign policy, as well as the planning and organization of Europe’s future. Panelists representing government, science and industry agreed in broad terms that Germany and Italy, as core members of the EU, have the power and the opportunity to guide the EU through necessary reforms, and suggested possible strategies to accomplish these goals. The whole report is published in English online.
On 19 January 2015, the Institut für Europäische Politik (IEP) organized a brainstorming workshop on the topic “Central Asia – Exploring EU interests and options” in cooperation with the European Union Institute for Security Studies. The workshop took place in the Federal Foreign Office in Berlin. A wide range of experts discussed current and future options and opportunities for the EU relations with Central Asia. The panelists have put their major attention to the continuation and refinery of the EU’s activities in the area, in the course of its current geopolitical ascension and regarding the rising interests of Russia, China, the US and even India. Despite previous successes, such as the EU being the region’s most important trading partner, topic and format should be reviewed and “lessons learned” should be considered. The whole report is published in English online.
On 10 December 2014, the IEP lunch debate on the topic of “The Stabilization of the Eurozone: Current Successes, Unfinished Business” with Thomas Westphal, Director of European Policy in the Federal Ministry of Finance, took place at the Representation of the European Commission in Berlin. Michael Vollprecht, Economic and Financial Counsellor from the Political Division of the European Commission in Berlin, gave the opening remarks. Prof. Dr. Mathias Jopp, director of the Institut für Europäische Politik, moderated the event. Thomas Westphal discussed the economy and monetary situation in the Eurozone countries and various strategies for strengthening the Euro.
The whole report is published in English online.
On 4 December 2014, the IEP lunch debate on the topic of „Fortunately United: Retrospective and perspective of the European integration“ with Dr. Hans-Gert Pöttering, former President of the European Parliament and Chairman of the Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung, took place at the Representation of the European Commission in Berlin on the occasion of the publication of his book “Wir sind zum Glück vereint. Mein europäischer Weg”. Prof. Dr. Hartmut Marhold, Deputy Chairman of the Executive Board of the Institut für Europäische Politik and Director of Research and Development of the Centre international de formation européenne (cife), moderated the event. Richard Kühnel, Representative of the European Commission in Germany, and Frank Piplat, Head of the European Parliament Information Office in Germany gave a short biograph of the dedicated European politician and highlighted his skills as an arbiter while Head of the European’s People Party and as 23rd President of the European Parliament. The whole report on the debate is published in English online.
It is clear that the primary responsibility with respect to the representation of citizens’ interests in the EU decision making process lies with the European Parliament. Indeed, the EP is directly elected, acts as co-legislator in the legislative process of the EU and possesses full-fledged budgetary powers. On the contrary, national parliaments are first and for all responsible to control the activities of their national ministers in the Council.
During recent years, however, the role of national parliaments in EU policy making has been strengthened. Notably the Lisbon Treaty has given a strong impetus in this respect. In Article 12 TEU, the different contributions of national parliaments to EU policy making are listed. Furthermore the First Protocol annexed to the Lisbon Treaty deals with information to be provided to national parliaments regarding recent policy developments, as well as with COSAC, the forum for interparliamentary cooperation within the Union. The Second Protocol describes the role of national parliaments in the process of application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality (the so-called ‘yellow’ and ‘red’ card procedure).
In this way the EP and national parliaments have their own, but strictly separate, responsibilities with regard to the further development of the integration process.
Now, both parliamentary branches would be wise to realize that, as directly elected instances, they both do represent the interests of the same citizens. These are common interests which they have to serve, each from their own perspective. In this process both levels, the national and the European one, should try to develop a, as much as possible, coherent approach.
The legitimacy of the EU decision making process for example would be well served if both parliamentary branches start to cooperate in a more structural and intensive way compared to what is happening today. So national parliaments could invite committees of the EP to come over to their member states in order to discuss -in the national parliament concerned- day to day business in the policy field in question. National parliaments also could organize periodically public hearings or debates in their member states about topical issues for which they invite, apart from relevant stakeholders and the media, individual members of the EP. Similar initiatives could be taken with regard to political groups of the EP respectively individual members of those groups.
Similar initiatives of course can be taken by the European Parliament with regard to their national counterparts. However, in view of the fact that the EP is the natural and fully competent participant in the EU decision making process, initiatives should originate in the first instance from national parliaments.
Equally national parliaments should position themselves -in contacts with their constituencies and electorate- much more than happens today as part of an international layer of government, in this case, the European Union. Because, indeed, national parliaments are on a daily basis engaged with legislation and other policy issues having a European background. What is urgently needed here is more ‘outreach’ to the ordinary citizen.
One of the major -and structural- problems the European Union is confronted with these days, concerns the ‘distance’ between the citizen and the European Union as well as the transparency and legitimacy of the EU decision making process. By cooperating more closely, the European Parliament and national parliaments should be able to bridge that gap, at least partially.
Photo source: presstv.ir
Between 8-10 September 2016 on 14th Biannual Conference of EACES European Association for Comparative Economic Studies Ágnes Szunomár (research fellow, head of research group on Development Economics of IWE CERS HAS) was elected secretary of EACES in Regensburg.
January 17, 2017
Speaker: Desmond King, Nuffield College, University of Oxford
January 31, 2017
Speaker: Nicolas Lupo, LUISS, “Mechanisms and Challenges of Parliamentary Democracy in Europe”
February 21, 2017
Speaker: Alan Finlayson, UEA, “Performance Rites: Rhetoric, Public Speech and Contemporary Democracy”
February 28, 2017
Speaker: Daniel Stockemer, Université d’Ottawa “The Eurovision Song Contest and (Strategic) Voting”
March 14, 2017
Speaker: Sergi Pardos-Prado, Merton College, University of Oxford, “The ‘left-behind’ are not alone: class alliances and extreme right success”
March 28, 2017
Speaker: Christian Schuster, UCL, “Weberian state structures and bureaucratic behaviour: evidence from survey experiments with public servants”
April 11, 2017
Speaker: Federica Bicchi, LSE, “Practicing Recognition and De-Recognition: European Positions in the Arab-Israeli Conflict”
May 2, 2017
Speaker: Rens Vliegenthart, University of Amsterdam, “Do issue reputations drive party preference, or is it the other way around? Disentangling the direction of causality between issue ownership and party preference”
In many member states euro scepticism is gaining importance. Furthermore, in all member states the support for European cooperation has been affected negatively by the economic crisis.
People are already concerned that an important number of euro-sceptics will win a seat in the European Parliament. Apart from that, the risk of a low turnout does exist, as evidenced in earlier elections.
Obviously, a discussion about the ins and outs of European cooperation is a good thing. However, such a discussion should be organised in a balanced and nuanced manner. In debates of euro-sceptics one often hears only shouting, one-liners and slogans. Nonetheless, it is the full story that should be told and explained.
So far, from the side of national governments there is hardly any input to this debate. Yet, an adequate response is desperately needed.
In order to tell the whole story it seems that three things are important:
1. To demonstrate the necessity and importance of international cooperation,
2. To explain the adequacy of the EU framework for that purpose and, connected to that,
3. To explain the originality of the decision-making procedures.
As to the need for international cooperation one merely has to refer to the global threats and challenges of today’s world, such as the economic crisis; asylum and immigration; environmental protection, climate change and energy; scarcity problems with regard to water and food; combat of poverty; and combat of terrorism. All issues mentioned are, one way or the other, related to our security. Moreover, because all of them have an international character, it is obvious that individual countries are not able any more to cope with these matters on their own. On the contrary, the need for international cooperation is clearly indicated.
In Europe we have an appropriate framework for cooperation between states at our disposal: the European Union with its institutions and legal instruments. Indeed, different from other international organisations where essentially decisions having a political character are produced, it is in the framework of the EU -a community of law- that policies can be truly developed.
Then, when one analyses the essentials of the decision-making procedures of the EU it becomes apparent that member states are in fact fully in control. Because, they -as ‘Herren der Verträge’- are the ones who negotiate and conclude the basic texts, the treaties. They are also the ones who -in the European Council, the framework of member states’ representatives at the highest political level- establish the general political guidelines including the policy priorities of the EU as well as the timetable for their completion.
It is only within the framework thus established by the member states themselves that the so-called supranational procedures are of application: the exclusive right of the Commission, (qualified) majority voting in the Council, and co-legislative competences for the European Parliament. Last but not least, the Court of Justice controls the legality of the acts of the institutions.
All these elements have their justification. The Commission operates in the general interest of the European Union and not with national interests in mind -which is the natural attitude of member states. Majority voting does contribute to the efficiency of the cooperation. The European Parliament is directly elected and their co-legislative (and co-budgetary) powers illustrate the democratic character of the process. Finally, the presence of an independent judiciary underlines the rule of law nature of the EU cooperation.
All in all, it is not difficult to argue that the EU decision-making process on an overall basis is a democratic one.
That being said, if there is a problem with regard to the popularity of the European Union -and there certainly is one- the problem is not so much related to the democratic character of the decision-making process but has to do with the legitimacy and the credibility of the process. Indeed, citizens are not aware of these elements or do not understand their exact meaning, and politicians do not explain them. Often one may even wonder whether politicians themselves do understand the process fully.
Be that as it may, the ‘distance’ between the citizen and the EU has become a serious and urgent problem and has to be overcome.
Of course, in order to solve these problems there rests a responsibility with the EU institutions, members of the European Parliament in the first place, the media and, certainly also, the citizen him or herself. Indeed, for ordinary people it is not difficult to be informed about all topical developments. One only has to consult the multitude of news sites available.
However, above all, the first to be held responsible in this process are national politicians: the members of national governments and parliaments. Members of national governments should present themselves as a dimension of an international layer of governance and have to explain the achievements of the Brussels’ discussions. They must provide information on how the process works and should not blame Brussels in case they have not been able to push their national points of view fully through. Members of national parliaments have to recognise that their European agenda gradually has become as so important, not to say more important, compared to the national one.
So, Brussels is us and we are Brussels!
The conclusion to be drawn from this is that in order to cope with the global challenges of today the EU framework is a suitable one. With regard to the objectives and the direction of the cooperation, the member states are the ones playing a determining role in the EU integration process. The supranational procedures are the instruments, nothing more and nothing less, allowing the European Union to implement the objectives set out by the member states themselves. Moreover, supranational decision-making serves the democratic character, the efficiency and the effectiveness of the overall process.
This has to be explained to the citizen. It is the primary role for the member states to do so.
Therefore, from a point of view of substance, citizens have all interest to cast their vote in elections to the European Parliament.
Politicians in their turn have to start working to explain the relevance of EU cooperation. They have to hurry up, the deadline until the end of May is short.
There is no time to lose!
Jaap W. de Zwaan
Secretary-General of TEPSA
Picture: © unitedexplanations
All along the existence of the European Union -and its predecessor organisations- the question has been raised whether the EU decision making suffers from a democratic deficit. In fact without a lot of debate this question was always answered in the affirmative.
These days there are good reasons to argue that the decision making process at the European level is a democratic one.
Up to the eighties of the last century the European Parliament was referred to as an ‘assembly’, not as a parliament. In that period the parliament essentially possessed the right to deliver opinions in a certain number of policy areas. Since the end of the seventies, however, developments have gone fast. In 1979 the first direct election of the European Parliament members took place. The European Single Act (entry into force in 1987) introduced the cooperation procedure. The Maastricht Treaty (1993) improved the working of the cooperation procedure and added the co-decision procedure. The Amsterdam Treaty (1999) (abolished the cooperation procedure and) transformed the co-decision procedure into a properly speaking co-legislative instrument: without agreement between Council and European Parliament a decision cannot be adopted.
Finally but not least, the Lisbon Treaty (2009) widened the scope of application of the co-decision procedure and reinforced the competences of the parliament in the external domain (the competence to give consent). Furthermore, the treaty introduced the institutional innovation according to which the European Council, when proposing a candidate for President of the Commission, has to take into account the elections to the European Parliament. The candidate is then elected by the European Parliament. The Lisbon Treaty also produced two protocols on the role of national parliaments, one of which concerned the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality.
Even if one takes into account the innovations brought by the Lisbon Treaty, still certain issues have to be settled regarding the working of the European Parliament. The first issue concerns the objection that, in the absence of a European ‘demos’, the parliament cannot pretend to represent the European citizens. Secondly there is the argument that the scope of the co-decision procedure –referred to in the treaties as the ‘ordinary legislative procedure’- is not as yet an absolute one. Furthermore criticism –expressed in practice by the highest constitutional judge in Germany, the Bundesverfassungsgericht- can be made regarding the composition of the parliament in view of the fact that during the elections once in five years the principle ‘one man one vote’ is not respected. The next point is related to the fact that the European Parliament, differently from an ordinary parliament, does not dispose of a -formal- right of initiative regarding policy making. And, additionally concerns are expressed regarding the lack of visibility of the members of the parliament (people hardly know members of the parliament) respectively the lack of transparency of their work.
Now, certainly it is true that -at least for the moment- a European demos does not exist. However, is that a real problem? In the context of the European Union cooperation the focus is more on Member States and the peoples of the Member States (Article 1 TEU refers to the ‘peoples of Europe’). That being the case it is difficult to criticize the existence of a parliament which operates in the interest of all these peoples. Then, indeed the scope of application of the co-decision procedure is not as yet an absolute one: a few policy domains, such as the common foreign and security policy, are not covered by this ‘ordinary’ decision making procedure. However, it may be expected –in conformity with the gradual character of the integration process- that this defect will be solved in the future, for example at the occasion of a next treaty amending procedure. As to the composition of the European Parliament, it is fair to say that the working of an international organisation (which the EU essentially is) cannot be fully compared with the functioning of a state. In that context there does exist a justification that, at the European level, the (federal) principle of equality of states has been preferred over the one regarding complete equality of their citizens, for example with regard to voting power. More particular it is the principle of ‘degressive’ proportionality which is of application -between the Member States- during the European elections.
Furthermore, it is true that the European Parliament does not possess a proper right of initiative regarding policy making. In view of the supranational characteristics of the EU cooperation the responsibility concerning the initiation of policies essentially rests with the Commission. The choice to make the Commission, the institution taking care of the general interest of the Union, responsible for the initiation of EU policy making, is an original one –in fact it is one of the foundations of the Schuman philosophy- which so far has proven to be effective. That being said, according to Article 225 TFEU the Parliament may request the Commission to submit an appropriate proposal on which it considers that a Union act is required. However, as is well known, the Commission is not obliged to give a positive follow-up to such a proposal. Finally, the observations regarding the lack of transparency and visibility concern more the legitimacy of the work of the parliament than that they demonstrate a problem regarding the democratic character of that work. That being said, of course something has to be done to overcome these objections. Here we touch upon the responsibility of a number of parties, such as the members of the European Parliament themselves, national politicians (members of national governments and members of national parliaments), but also the citizen him/herself who indeed can find easily numerous sources of information about EU activities on the internet.
So, as to all the objections and observations expressed an adequate answer can be provided.
If one then further analyses the working of the integration process globally speaking, one can establish that the Member States still play an essential role in policy making, as the architects of the treaties (‘Die Herren der Verträge’) and members of the European Council and the Council. On the other hand the Commission, in the interest of the European Union as a whole, performs the single and unique role as exclusive and independent policy initiator.
The directly elected European Parliament does represent the citizens of all Member States when being involved in the legislative process, the development of the EU external policies and the establishment of the EU budget. During the exercise of these responsibilities the European Parliament acts on equal footing with the Council, which means that without the agreement of the parliament no decision can be taken in these areas.
Finally but not least, national parliaments are in a position to control the activities of their ministers at the European level while also being able to survey the application, by the EU legislator, of the subsidiarity principle.
All in all it appears that the EU decision making process is composed of elements representing a careful balance between the interests of the European Union and the Member States on the one hand, and the interests of the citizens of the Member States on the other. In this process the European Parliament exercises important and typically parliamentary prerogatives.
The way this overall process functions in practice can be qualified as democratic, efficient and effective. At least hardly arguments are available to convincingly demonstrate that the process is undemocratic in character.
For all those reasons one only can hope that during the European elections of 22 to 25 May a high turnout will be achieved. The parliament deserves our vote!
Jaap W. de Zwaan
Events, conferences and presentations
22 Sept. 2016 IWE CERS HAS – Budapest
The political economy of the Eastern European regime change in the mirror of world system theories. Lecture by Tamás Gerőcs followed by debate (In Hungarian)
30 Sept. 2016 Hungarian Academy of Sciences – Budapest
Within the frames of ‘Night of the researchers’ series, Erzsébet N. Rózsa held a lecture on “The transformation of the Middle East”
October 2016 British University of Egypt – Cairo
Erzsébet N. Rózsa was lecturing and taking part in roundtable discussions on actual Middle East issues
3-4 Oct. 2016 CESCI Central European Service for Cross-Border Initiatives – Kosice, Slovakia
European Neighborhood Policy and Eastern partnership – beyond 2020“ – Erzsébet N. Rózsa held a lecture on Turkey and the Eastern Partnership
7 Oct. 2016 Corvinus University of Budapest – Hungary
‘The One Belt – One Road Initiative seen from China’ conference organized by The Institute of International Studies of the Corvinus University of Budapest and the Institute of World Economics, Center for Economic and Regional Studies of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences and the delegation of the Sichuan University
13 Oct. 2016 IWE CERS HAS – Budapest
‘The Visegrad countries and TTIP’ lecture and debate by Tamás Novák. Within the frames of ‘Workshop Talks on Thursdays’ series. (In Hungarian)
20 Oct. 2016 Europe Club – Budapest
Monthly conference: ‘Europe and the challenge of the digital era’ by György Beck, president of Vodafone Hungary. András Inotai organizer, also among the participants.
25 Oct. 2016 Spinoza House – Budapest
‘Old and new challenges of the European Union’ – lecture by András Inotai.
26 Oct. 2016 German-Hungarian Forum – Budapest
International conference: ‘Closing plenary panel on EU developments and EU-Hungary relations’ – with the participation of András Inotai
3 Nov. 2016 IWE CERS HAS – Budapest
‘Development of international production networks, the role of corporate governance in the transformation of spatial patterns of production’ lecture and debate by Gábor Túry. Within the frames of ‘Workshop Talks on Thursdays’ series. (In Hungarian)
7 Nov. 2016 IWE CERS HAS – Budapest
Workshop of the NKFIH no. 115578 project “Factors influencing export performance – a comparison of three European regions”
Lecture by Andrea Éltető (IWE CERS HAS), Katalin Antalóczy (Budapest Business School): Post-crisis export trends and promotion policies on the periphery of the European Union
Lecture by Norbert Szijártó (IWE CERS HAS): Fiscal adjustment and internal devaluation after the global financial crisis
Discussion on further research – Short introduction by Gábor Túry (IWE CERS HAS) on automotive production chains
8 Nov. 20116 Portfolio – Budapest
András György Deák was the moderator of the panel ’Trends in European and Hungarian energy supply’
10 Nov. 2016 Scientific Council of Hungarian Internal Affairs – Budapest
Conference on „Modern Age people’s movements or a complex approach to migration”
Lecture in Hungarian by Erzsébet N. Rózsa: Miért éppen a Közel-Kelet? [Why the Middle East?]
10-11 Nov. 2016 IWE CERS HAS – Central European University Budapest
10-11 Nov. 2016 Valletta – Malta
TEPSA Pre-Presidency Conference – with the participation of András Inotai
16 Nov. 2016 International Business School – Budapest
’China and the global economy, with special emphasis on EU-China relations’ – lecture by András Inotai.
16 Nov. 2016 British Embassy – Budapest
Csaba Weiner delivered a lecture entitled “Economic Footprint versus Energy Policy Capture. Is Hungary a new model for Russian power projection?” at the workshop “Countering Russian influence in the Central European region by upskilling and empowering investigative journalists to recognise and expose Russian influence in the media”, organised by the British Embassy Budapest and Political Capital
17 Nov. 2016 Farkas Heller Institute of Economy of the Pázmány Péter Catholic University – Budapest
Lecture by István Kőrösi: ’The development of education&training as well as R&D in the EU – Costs and results’
17-18 Nov. 2016 Offenbach – Germany
Priorities for the EU (organized by Foundation for European Progressive Studies, Brussels) – András Inotai among the participants
17-16 Nov. 2016 Warsaw – Poland
Conference participation of Gábor Túry: Global appreciation of the Central European region along the enterprise value chain – The Case Study of the Volkswagen Group
‘The Future of Europe – Central and Eastern Europe in a Comparative Perspective CASE – Center for Social and Economic Research 25th Anniversary Conference’
21-22 Nov. 2016 Lisbon – Portugal
28 Nov. 2016 Europe Club – Budapest
Monthly conference: “Trump’s America” – after presidential elections, Tibor Frank, professor, member of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences. András Inotai organizer, also among the participants.
30 Nov. 2016 EU diplomatic corps – Budapest
’Global and European impacts of Brexit’ – lecture by András Inotai
1 Dec. 2016 FIW Research Centre International Economics – Vienna, Austria
9th Conference of FIW RCIE.
Lecture by Katalin Völgyi: “TPP versus RCEP – From the perspective of Japan’s trade policy”
1 Dec. 2016 Embassy of the Slovak Republic in the Russian Federation and the Institute of Europe of the Russian Academy of Sciences – Moscow
’Relation of the Visegrad Countries and the European Union with Russia’
Lecture by Csaba Weiner: ’Energy security and diversification: A view from Budapest’
1-2 Dec. 2016 Slovak Institute – Moscow; Institute of Europe of the Russian Academy of Sciences –
Csaba Weiner gave a presentation entitled “Energy Security and Diversification: A View from Budapest” at the international scientific conference “Relations of the Visegrad Countries and the European Union with Russia”, dedicated to the Presidency of the Slovak Republic in the European Union, and organised by the Institute of Europe of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow and the Embassy of the Slovak Republic, Moscow
5 Dec. 2016 Progressive Economy – Brussels, Belgium
International conference on the ‘State of the European Union’ with the participation of András Inotai
7 Dec. 2016 Andrássy Circle – Budapest
‘Balance of one decade of Hungary’s membership in the EU’ – lecture by András Inotai
12 Dec. 2016 Europe Club – Budapest
Monthly conference: “Sustainable Governance Indicators 2016” Report of the Bertelsmann Foundation, Christof Schiller, Bertelsmann Foundation. Organized by András Inotai.
Seminar with Wolfgang Wessels, Director, Centre for Turkey and European Union Studies, University of Cologne, author of the book “The European Council”.
More information about the event is available here.
Seminar with Michael Cox, Director of LSE IDEAS and Emeritus Professor of International Relations at London School of Economics.
The list of speakers is available here.
Conference within the framework of the New-Med research network.
The programme of the event is available here.
Conference within the framework of New Pact for Europe research project. With the participation of Sandro Gozi, Under-Secretary for European Affairs in the office of Prime Minister.
The programme of the event is available here.
Conference on the perspectives and consequences of the British referendum of 23 June 2016.
The programme of the event is available here.
Conference within the framework of the Governing Europe project in cooperation with Centro Studi sul Federalismo and Open Society European Policy Institute.
The programme of the event is available here.
More information about the project can be found here.
Debate on the occasion of the launch of the book edited by Cesare Merlini and published by Il Mulino (Working language: Italian, with no translation).
The programme of the event (in Italian) is available here.
Abdelkarim Amengay obtains the prestigious Joseph-Armand-Bomb Canada Graduate Scholarship
This scholarship, valued at 75,000 euros over three years, aims to develop research skills by supporting students who have achieved excellent results in their undergraduate and graduate studies in the humanities and who demonstrate an excellent Research potential.
Nicolas Leron received the Prix de Thèse Pierre PFLIMLIN
An accessit has been delivererd to Nicolas LERON for his work entitled “ The constitutional governance of judge : the institutionalisation of a new mode of regulation of the risk of constitutional conflict in the European Union “, dissertation in political science which he defended on January 29, 2014 at Sciences Po.
Matteo Del Fabbro, Visiting PhD Candidate, Gran Sasso Science Institute, Urban Policies, September 2015 – April 2017
Matteo del Fabbro’s research interests include metropolisation, metropolitan governance, urban agglomerations, European cities, polycentric urban systems, conceptualisations and representations of the city, everyday spatial practices, neighbourhoods and well-being.
Bjørn Erik Rasch, Professor of political science, University of Oslo, January – March 2017
His research is currently focused on legislative organization, parliamentarism, and constitutional amendment procedures. He has written or edited twelve books, of which The Role of Governments in Legislative Agenda Setting (co-edited with Tsebelis, Routledge 2011) and Parliaments and Government Formation (co-edited with Cheibub and Martin; Oxford University Press 2015) the two latest ones. He has published numerous articles in books and journals such as Public Choice, Legislative Studies Quarterly, Journal of Legislative Studies, and European Journal of Political Economy. Bjørn Erik Rasch was member of a Constitutional Commission appointed by the Norwegian Parliament in 2003 to review and modernize the Norwegian Court of Impeachment, and a committee who designed a new electoral system for the Sami Parliament in Northern Norway. He is heading (principal investigator) the research project “The Evolution of Parliamentarism and Its Political Consequences,” funded by the Norwegian Research Council 2013-2017. Last but not least, Bjørn Erik Rasch is member of The Norwegian Academy of Science and Letters.
Assaf Shapira, Visiting Postdoctoral Fellow, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Department of Political Science, October 2016 – June 2017
Assaf Shapira’s research largely focuses on the representation and participation of citizens and various social groups, especially minorities and other marginalized communities, in politics and particularly in Israeli politics. He has previously worked on issues relating to the representation of women in politics and expanding immigrants’ citizenship rights, among others. During his stay at the CEE, Assaf Shapira intends to develop and use the Intra-Party Democracy (IPD) Index, which he recently designed (together with Prof. Gideon Rahat) as a tool enabling the evaluation of the level of internal democracy of political parties.
Tinette Schnatterer, Visiting Research Fellow, Universität Konstanz, Politik-und Verwaltungswissenschaften, August 2016 – June 2017
Tinette Schnatterer’s research interests include democratic responsiveness, public opinion, public policy, agenda setting, political sociology and legislative studies
David Schäfer, Visiting PhD Candidate, London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE), International Relations Department, January – March 2017
David Schäfer’s research interests include banking union, economic and monetary union, ideas and constructivism
Ilya Zarankin, Visiting PhD Candidate, National Research University Higher School of Economics, Moscow, November 2016 – March 2017
Ilya Zarankinn research interests are political elites, especially the issue of the ministers’ recruitment. Earlier he studied career trajectories and recruitment similarities of Soviet and Russian ministers. Now he compares them to the corps of the French ones.
PhD Candidate in Post-crisis developments in EU policy-making (PhD network PLATO – ESR3)
The Centre d’études européennes (CEE), Sciences Po, invites applications for a PhD fellowship on ‘Post-crisis developments in EU policy-making, possibly with focus on social issues and welfare state issues’ as part of the PhD network ‘The Post-Crisis Legitimacy of the European Union’ (PLATO).
Applicants should hold a master degree in political science, sociology, mixed methods.
The position is announced for a period of 3 years with no teaching obligations. The starting date for the fellowship is 1 September 2017.
Application deadline: 30 January 2017
Workshop, Sciences Po, CEE, Paris, 19 May 2017
Lobbying and diplomacy in/of the EU: two faces of the same coin?
This workshop aims to bring together scholars working on diplomacy and lobbying in and of the European Union (EU) to investigate whether these two activities have now become faces of the same coin. This question has acquired relevance in light of the significant changes that we observe in the field of diplomacy – an increasing range of topics to be discussed at the international level as well as a new set of actors being involved in diplomatic activities – and of the growing role of lobbying. By fostering a dialogue between two communities of scholars that have rarely crossed their mutual expertise, this workshop aims to open up a discussion about the role that lobbying and diplomacy play nowadays. The workshop thus investigates what makes lobbying and diplomacy similar and, at the same time, different, and how we can learn from the concepts and tools of these subareas in advancing our knowledge of the EU’s multilevel political system as an arena where lobbying and diplomacy occur as well as an actor that practices both lobbying and diplomatic activities.
Abstracts of maximum 250 words should be submitted to Olivier Rozenberg (olivier•rozenberg©sciencespo•fr) and Benedetta Voltolini (benedetta•voltolini©sciencespo•fr) by the 16th December 2016. Please feel free to contact them if you require any further information. Authors will be informed of the acceptance/refusal of their abstract by the end of January 2017. Part of the costs to participate in the workshop are covered.
Call for proposals from Sciences Po’s partner:
Workshop at the University of Oxford, 19-20 June 2017
Conveners: Dr Félix Krawatzek and Dr Lea Müller-Funk
This workshop seeks to gather an interdisciplinary group of researchers undertaking innovative research on migrants’ political remittances and political transnationalism. The question of how political ideas and practices circulate between migrants and their home country has clearly gained in relevance with the current increase in worldwide migration and requires historically sound investigations. The workshop continues discussions initiated during “Political, Social, and Economic Migrant Remittances: Content, Social Networks, and Impacts” held at Nuffield College (Oxford) in September 2016.
Please apply with a paper abstract (max. 500 words) and a short CV by 21 December 2016 addressed to felix•krawatzek©politics•ox•ac•uk and lea•muller-funk©politics•ox•ac•uk. They will finalise the programme by the end of January 2017. Papers should be sent two weeks before the workshop. Depending on the interest of participants, a publication of selected conference papers in a special issue is intended.
In 2016, Thomas Aguilera received three awards* for his PhD thesis** in which he analyses public policy on squats and slums in the regions of Paris and Madrid. It shows that illegality is not a by-product of capitalist and liberal societies but is in fact at the heart of the state-building process. Public authorities produce and exploit illegality in order to govern societies. Governments produce vulnerabilities as much as welfare.
Photo: Lonely silhouette walking in front of run-down buildings in a street in Paris: Credits: @ Ivan Bastien / Shutterstock
On September 25-26 the Institut für Europäische Politik organised its annual academic conference in cooperation with the Arbeitskreis Europäische Integration. More than 50 academics and practitioners gathered in Berlin in order to discuss the “Current Challenges for Germany’s European Policy: Deepening, Widening, Neighbourhood“.During the first panel potential further strategies for reforming the EU’s political system were discussed. All panelists representing members from the Spinelli Group, the Glienicker Gruppe and the Groupe Eiffel agreed that the Lisbon Treaty provided an appropriate legal framework for current challenges and demanded full exploitation of its text. Ideas were exchanged on the question of how to deal with increasing heterogeneity among the EU Member States and necessary reforms of EU institutions in order to increase their democratic legitimacy. The second panel dealt with the reforms of the Economic and Monetary Union. Given that the crisis management within the Eurozone was perceived successful so far, the panelists focused on questions of how to increase the EU’s competitiveness and of how to guarantee liability of future national economic reforms. The future role of the EU’s enlargement policy as a foreign policy tool was discussed during the conference’s third panel. Enlargement policy was defined to represent an integration rather than a foreign policy tool of the EU. This means that it needed to be complemented by foreign policy initiatives. In light of these considerations the preconditions for a successful enlargement policy were debated. The conference concluded with discussions on the European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP). This debate was guided by the question of whether the general principles of the ENP needed redefinition. In light of the latest developments the panelists agreed that the ENP needed a differentiated approach and other global actors and their interests needed to be included in the considerations of how to stabilize the neighbourhood that currently represented rather a ring of fire than a ring of friends.
The conference was completed by a dinner speech by Peter Altmaier, Head of the Federal Chancellery and Federal Minister for Special Tasks, and a concluding speech by Werner Hoyer, President of the European Investment Bank.
Read more here.
The IEP Lunch Debate on the topic “Perspectives of the Economic and Monetary Union” with Dr. Peter Ptassek, Deputy Director of the European Department of the Federal Foreign Office, took place on the 16th of September 2014 at the Representation of the European Commission in Berlin, Germany. The event was moderated by Prof. Dr. Mathias Jopp, director of the Institute for European Politics (IEP).
Dr. Ptassek began his introductory speech by illuminating several questions facing Europe, including not only still existing concerns about the Monetary Union, but also Europe’s relations with Russia in light of the Ukraine Crisis, and the impending referendum in the UK. Ptassek pointed out that he believed the height of the economic crisis to be behind us, and the monetary union “dishevelled”, but still alive. Ptassek further specified that the Monetary Union includes a clear external dimension, specifically the connection between economic strength and the weight of foreign policy. The whole report on the lunch debate is published in English here.
12 December, Rome,
“Implementing the EU Global Strategy”. The Mercator European Dialogue’s workshop on the implementation of the EU Global Strategy (EUGS) is organised by the Istituto Affari Internazionali (IAI) in cooperation with the Barcelona Centre for International Affairs (CIDOB). The workshop will create a room for dialogue and exchange of views with EU and national officials involved in the implementation of EUGS.
16 December, Catania,
“Does the Eu-Turkey Deal Represent a Model to be Replicated in Other Contexts?”. Workshop in the framework of the research project “Global Turkey in Europe”. The principal aim of the event is to further discuss the EU-Turkey deal and examine whether it represents a model to be replicated in other contexts, with a particular focus on Libya.
16 December, Athens,
“Which “Crisis”? Understanding and Addressing Migration”. Conference in the framework of the research project New-Med, in cooperation with the Hellenic Foundation for European and Foreign Policy (Eliamep).
8 December, Nairobi
“The EU, the US and the international strategic dimension of Sub-Saharan Africa”. A conference in the framework of the research project “The EU, the US and the international strategic dimension of Sub-Saharan Africa: peace, security and development in the Horn of Africa“, in cooperation with the Foundation for European Progressive Studies (FEPS) and the National Democratic Institute (NDI).
25 November, Rome
“New Pact for Europe: Rebuilding Trust Through Dialogue”. Transnational meeting (Italy-Poland) of the New Pact for Europe project.
23 November, Brussels
“EUNITED against Crime: Digital evidence, privacy and security in the European Union”. Seminar organised in cooperation with Ceps. Presentation of the results of the IAI research on “EUnited against crime: Improving criminal justice in the European Union cyberspace”, supported by Microsoft.
21 November, Rome
“Moving forward the EU-India Security Dialogue”. Conference within the framework of the project Moving forward the EU-India Security Dialogue: Traditional and emerging issues.
18 November, Rome
“Technologies, personnel and procedures in EU conflict prevention and peacebuilding”. Workshop within the framework of the project EU-CIVCAP.
4 November, Athens
“The EU-Turkey Deal and its Implications for the Asylum Capacities of EU Border Countries”. Workshop in the framework of the project Global Turkey in Europe and in cooperation with Mercator European Dialogue (MED).
21 October, Rome
“Trust-building in North East Asia and the role of the EU”. International conference organised by the Istituto Affari Internazionali (IAI) with the kind support of the Korea Foundation (KF). The conference focuses on the question of peace and security in North East Asia, examining in particular the efforts, and the initiatives, aimed at regional cooperation and trust-building undertaken by the leaderships of the Republic of Korea (ROK), Japan and the People’s Republic of China in recent times.
18 October, Rome
“La tempesta perfetta. Cittadini europei di fronte a sicurezza, immigrazione e crisi economica”. Presentation of the report on the perceptions of European citizens on topics such as the European economic crisis, the refugee emergency and the recent terrorist attacks, carried out by the Interdepartmental Research Center on Political Change (CIRCaP), University of Siena, within the European project EUENGAGE (working language: Italian).
14-15 October, Bratislava
“Quo Vadis EU? Brexit, Political Polarisation and Democratic Deconsolidation”. Workshop in the framework of the Mercator European Dialogue project.
The new EU Global Strategy (EUGS) and the 2030 Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) Agenda provide an opportunity for the EU to refresh its global approach to development cooperation. The EUGS could promote resilience through coherence between internal and external policies, in line with the 2030 Agenda. The EUGS could establish a new EU approach to development combining resilience, development and conflict sensitivity. As a multi-diplomacy umbrella document fostering policy coherence, the EUGS will have to acknowledge and encourage a series of adjustments to be made in EU development diplomacy and cooperation to contribute to the universal and transformative SDG agenda.
The publication can be downloaded here.
Contemporary analysts differ over which EU actors are the main drivers of European integration and how they pursue it. “New intergovernmentalists” focused on political leaders’ deliberations in the Council clash with “new supranationalists” centred on technical actors’ policy design and enforcement in the Commission and other EU bodies, while both ignore “new parliamentarists” concerned with the European Parliament. This essay argues that only by considering the actions and interactions of all three main actors together can we fully understand the “new” EU governance and its problems. It uses in illustration the EU’s crises of money, borders and security. The essay also suggests that it is best to think about the future of EU governance not in terms of any hard core but rather as a “soft core” of member-states clustered in overlapping policy communities. It additionally proposes ways of reinforcing EU-level capacity for policy coordination with national-level decentralisation to address problems of democracy and legitimacy.
The publication can be downloaded here.
There is some degree of ambivalence, mistrust, and even hostility between Europe and Israel. Europeans see Israel on a path of permanent occupation of Palestinian territories. Israel sees the European posture as unbalanced and biased against Israel. Economic and institutional linkages are strong. A further strengthening of relations is however difficult unless a peaceful settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is reached. For the EU resolving the conflict is a matter of both interests and values. The engagement of the EU can take different forms, in the realm of sticks one may point to legislation concerning the labelling of products from Israeli settlements in the occupied territories and carrots such as the EU offer of a special privileged partnership with Israel. For the Israeli public a clearer perception of the costs of non-peace and the benefits from a resolution of the conflict could help unblock the stalemate and remove the deceptive illusion that the status quo is sustainable.
The publication can be downloaded here.
Civilian approaches and instruments are taking on increasing importance in conflict prevention and crisis management. The civilian missions of the European Union have become one of the most significant tools, contributing to the containment or the solution of crises in different areas. This volume offers a useful overview of EU civilian missions and Italy’s contribution to them. The historical background and analysis of institutional and legal aspects provide for a solid understanding of the ongoing dynamics between Brussels and Rome of mission management, the effectiveness and efficiency of the fieldwork, the recruitment and training of personnel, and the future prospect of these types of interventions. The pros and cons of European civilian crisis management are examined and presented in a clear and open manner, together with a list of policy recommendations. The last section of the book addresses young professionals interested in taking part in EU missions, describing the application procedures and the real job prospects for those who aspire to becoming an expert in this field. This book contains the highlights of the debate and summarizes the recommendations of the seminar “Civili in missione. L’esperienza italiana nelle missioni dell’Unione europea”, held in Rome on 17-18 December 2015 in the framework of the “Farnesina Open Doors” programme. The seminar was organised by the Italian Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation, in collaboration with the Istituto Affari Internazionali (IAI).
The publication can be downloaded here.
Since 2013, the European migration and asylum regime has entered a phase of crisis, which reveals the deep interdependencies between its different components (including intra-EU mobility) and the unbalanced nature of its normative foundations. This original structural fragility had not fundamentally compromised the overall functioning of the regime until two major exogenous factors (the economic crisis, with its asymmetrical impact on the eurozone, and the wave of political instability and conflicts on the southern shore of the Mediterranean) brought its intrinsic limits to the point of rupture. The ongoing, highly contentious process of reform of the European migration and asylum regime is an unprecedented and crucially important test of the capacity of one the European Union’s key sectors to evolve under pressure and to adapt to a rapidly and deeply changing geopolitical, economic and demographic environment.
The publication can be downloaded here.
The Swedish Institute of International Affairs (UI), in cooperation with the Stockholm University Graduate School of International Studies, hosted a discussion on the latest trends shaping how the EU institutions operate and interact.
Much has changed in the EU in 2014. Elections to the European Parliament altered the contours of its party politics. A new Commission President was appointed using a new nomination system. And both the European Council and External Action Service (EEAS) changed leadership, with heightened expectations. What can we expect from the EU’s institutions in the years ahead? Will the Commission become more politicized? Will the European Council continue to be a driving force? Will the EEAS finally reach its potential? How can the EU shore up its economy, regain the confidence of its citizens and manage security threats in the ‘near abroad’?
Speakers: Neill Nugent, Emeritus Professor of Politics and Jean Monnet Professor of European Integration at Manchester Metropolitan University.
David Earnshaw, Chief Executive Officer of Burson-Marsteller in Brussels.
Michael Shackleton, Professor of European Institutions at Maastricht University.
Annegret Bendiek, Deputy Head of Research Division at the German Institute for International and Security Affairs.
Francis Jacobs, Head of the European Parliament Delegation to Ireland.
Helene Sjursen, Professor at ARENACentre for European Studies at the University of Oslo
The seminar was moderated by Mark Rhinard, Senior Research Fellow and head of the Europe Research Program at UI.
The Swedish Institute of International Affairs (UI) was the host of a discussion that brings together international perspectives on the possibilities and limits of Swedish defence cooperation.
Based on the premise that peace and security can only be achieved in cooperation with others, Tomas Bertelman was commissioned by the Swedish government to make an overview of Swedish defence cooperation, its present and possible future. The report was presented to the Swedish Government on 29 October 2014. What are the possibilities and limits of defence cooperation between the Nordic countries, the EU and NATO? What would be the possible consequences of that? Is this analysis shared by our neighbours?
Presentation by: Tomas Bertelman, Author and former Ambassador.
Comments by: Alyson Bailes, Adjunct Professor at the University of Iceland, former Director of the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) and British Ambassador to Finland.
Kestutis Jankauskas, Lithuanian Ambassador to NATO.
Eugeniusz Smolar, Senior Fellow at the Polish Institute of International Affairs in Warsaw, and former President of the Center for International Relations.
The seminar was moderated by Anna Wieslander, deputy Director at UI.
Conference: “The Prague Agenda 2016“, 1-2 December 2016, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Czech Republic, Czernin Palace, Prague
The Centre for European Security of the Institute of International Relations Prague in cooperation with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Czech Republic, Charles University in Prague, Metropolitan University Prague, Parliamentarians for Nuclear Non-Proliferation and Disarmament and the PragueVision organized the 6th Prague Agenda Conference. The conference focused on nuclear arms control, nuclear security, disarmament and non-proliferation. The conference spanned over two days, with the first day being an academic conference and the second day being a political conference. On the second day was presented a supportive letter from the President of the United States, Barack Obama.
The conference attended experts such as Jason Enia, Dieter Fleck, Matthew Kroenig, Jacek Bylica, Jeffrey Fields etc. For more information please visit this link.
Discussion: “The Referendum on the Refugee Quotas in Hungary – Questions and Possible Effects”, 23 November 2016, Institute of International Relations Prague
The Centre for International Law of the Institute of International Relations Prague organized a public discussion on “The Referendum on the Refugee Quotas in Hungary – Questions and Possible Effects”. Speaking at the event was Tamás Lattmann, a Senior Researcher at the Institute of International Relations Prague. The discussion was chaired by Veronika Bílková, a Senior Researcher and the Co-ordinator of the Centre for International Law of the Institute of International Relations Prague.
For more information please visit this link.
Presentation and discussion: “The Use of Force Against the Islamic State”, 15 November 2016, Institute of International Relations Prague
Two senior researchers at the Institute of International Relations Prague, Veronika Bílková and Tamás Lattmann, presented their policy paper “The Use of Force Against the Islamic State”. The presentation, followed by a discussion, was cordially organized by the Institute of International Relations and the Czech Society of International Law. The issues discussed included whether the IS is a state, and if not, what its legal nature is; whether the use of force against the IS by countries other than Syria and Iraq is lawful under international law; what the nature of the armed conflict(s) in which the IS is involved is, which rules apply to it (them) and what the status of the IS fighters is; as well as which crimes the IS has committed, and what the options for criminally prosecuting IS members for these crimes are.
For more information please visit this link.
Symposium: “8th International Symposium: Czech Foreign Policy”, 21-22 September 2016, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Czech Republic, Czernin Palace, Prague
The Institute of International Relations Prague in cooperation with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Czech Republic and the Konrad Adenauer Stiftung organized the 8th International Symposium “Czech Foreign Policy”. The symposium focused on a variety of aspects of Czech foreign policy from a wide range of different research fields. This year’s main topic was “Strategy in Foreign Policy”. The conference lasted for two days and welcomed numerous distinguished speakers, such as Nathalie Tocci, Deputy Director of Istituto Affari Internazionali, Editor of the International Spectator and special adviser to HR Federica Mogherini, Charles Gatti, senior fellow in the Foreign Policy Institute and a professorial lecturer of Russian and Eurasian Studies at the Johns Hopkins University, Piotr Buras, Head of the Warsaw office, European Council on Foreign Relations, Jakub Groszkowski, Head of Central European Department, Centre for Eastern Studies, Warsaw, or Matthias Schäfer, Head of Team of Economic Policy at Konrad Adenauer Stiftung, Berlin. The sessions focused on the Bratislava Summit, EU Defence and Security, Czech foreign policy and strategic relationships, resilience and public diplomacy.
For more information, reports and the videos from the conference please visit this link.
On 4-5 December 2014, LIIA organized the conference “Moving the Union Forward: Involvement, Growth, Sustainability” in cooperation with the Trans European Policy Studies Association (TEPSA) and the THESEUS Project, with generous support of the Fritz Thyssen Stiftung and the European Commission Representation in Latvia. This has been recognized as an official event of the Latvian EU Presidency and is also supported by the Presidency. Please find the provisional programme here.
On November 24 at 17.00, the Latvian Institute of International Affairs hosted a debate “From the Baltic Revolution to the Cultural Capital of Europe: An American Reflects on Returning to Riga”, featuring Douglas Wake. Douglas Wake is a former American diplomat, international civil servant and educator with extensive experience in Latvia and neighboring countries including Russia and much of Europe and Eurasia. He has been visiting Riga periodically since 1988 and served at the American Embassy on Raina Bulvaris from 1994 to 1997. Doug is now spending three months as a Visiting Fellow at the Latvian Institute of International Affairs here in Riga. He shared his personal impressions of some regional security, political and economic developments in Latvia and the broader region over the past quarter century; he looked forward to an exchange of views about current challenges and prospects for Latvia’s future in a dynamic international environment.
On November 13 at 15:00, the Latvian Institute of International Affairs in cooperation with the Centre for Geopolitical Studies (Lithuania) organized a public discussion “Ways Forward for the Baltic / European Energy Security”. The escalating Ukrainian crisis has moved European energy security higher up on the agenda, and for Latvia, its upcoming EU presidency adds extra importance to this traditionally topical issue. This event aimed at providing the latest information and analysis about energy security in Latvia, Baltic Sea Region and the European Union, as well as discussing different alternatives for further action, including the brand new Connecting Europe Facility, cooperation with the US et cetera. Particular attention was paid to the gas policies. The debate featured Krišjānis Kariņš (Member of the European Parliament, Latvia), Alan Riley (Professor of Law at City Law School, specializing in energy law, United Kingdom), Ruben Vermeeren (Policy Officer, European Commission, DG ENERGY), Mikhail Krutikhin (Partner, RusEnergy, Russia) and Juozas Augutis (Energy Security Research Centre, Lithuania). Web stream available here.
On 8 September, LIIA hosted the debate “Debriefing the Wales NATO Summit: Way Forward for NATO’s Eurasian Partnerships”, with the support of NATO. It was dedicated to the results of the Wales NATO summit, with a particular focus on the Alliance’s Eurasian partnerships (Ukraine, Moldova, Russia, Baltic Sea Region, etc.). Andris Spruds (Director, LIIA), Edgars Rinkevics (Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Latvia) and Janis Sarts (State Secretary, Ministry of Defence of Latvia) delivered introductory remarks. Panel speakers included Guna Snore (Program Officer, NATO Public Diplomacy Division), Eka Tkeshelashvili (President, Georgian Institute for Strategic Studies), Leonid Polyakov (Senior Fellow, Institute for Strategic Studies “New Ukraine”; former Deputy Minister of Defence, Ukraine), Sergey Oznobishchev (Director, Institute for Strategic Assessments, Russia), Robert Nurick (Senior Fellow, Atlantic Council of the United States, the US; Visiting Senior Fellow, Finnish Institute of International Affairs) and Doug Wake (Visiting Fellow, LIIA, the USA).
Check the conference video and photos.
Vincenzo Camporini, IAI Vice President and former Italian Chief of Defence General Staff, was nominated member of the Senior Expert Group (SEG), established to advise NATO in the reorganisation of Allied Commands.
The Department of EU International Relations and Diplomacy Studies at the College of Europe is looking back on ten successful years with over 700 alumni worldwide. Launched in September 2006, the MA study programme responded to a growing interest among students, scholars and practitioners in the European Union’s external relations and in European diplomacy. This anniversary also provides an occasion to look into the future of the study of EU external relations.
On 27 October 2016, the Department will celebrate this anniversary with a day of events:
9:30-11:00 Roundtable discussion “EU International Relations and Diplomacy Studies: Past, Present, Future” with alumni of the ten past promotions (from Copernicus to Chopin)
11:30-12:30 Honorary lecture “What’s wrong with the European Union?” by Prof. Dr. Dieter MAHNCKE, founding Director of the Department of EU International Relations and Diplomacy Studies and Visiting Professor at the College of Europe for 40 years; conferral of the title of Honorary Professor of the College of Europe.
Further information and free online registration for the roundtable and/or honorary lecture can be found here.
16:45-18:15 EU Diplomacy Lecture “The EU’s Common Foreign and Security Policy, 17 years on” by Dr. Javier SOLANA, President, ESADE Centre for Global Economy and Geopolitics, Barcelona-Madrid; former High Representative for the Common Foreign and Security Policy and Secretary General of the Council of the European Union.
Registration and information here.
For further information about the day of events, please visit www.coleurope.eu/10yearsIRD.
Bicchi, F. & Bremberg, N. (2016) European Diplomatic Practices: Contemporary Challenges and Innovative Approaches. European Security. 25:4, 2016: 391-406.
Bremberg, N. (2016) Making Sense of the EU?s Response to the Arab Uprisings: Foreign Policy Practice at Times of Crisis. European Security. 25:4, 2016: 423-441.
Borg, S. & Bremberg, N. (2016) Powerless Europe? Global Affairs.Published online: 28 October, 2016: 1-3.
Schmidt-Felzmann, Anke (2016) “Sweden under attack!” Lessons from past incidents for coping with a comprehensive synchronized attack on critical energy and information infrastructure, in Niglia, Alessandro (ed) Critical Infrastructure Protection Against Hybrid Warfare Security Related Challenges, NATO Science for Peace and Security Series, D. Information and Communicaton Security, vol. 46, IOS Press, 63-87, DOI:10.3233/978-1-61499-699-6-63.
Schmidt-Felzmann, Anke (2016) European Security and Dialogue with Russia: The Necessary Return to Facts, in Spruds, Andris & Potjomkina, Diana (eds) Coping with Complexity in the Euro-Atlantic Community and Beyond: Riga Conference Papers 2016, Riga: LIIA, 91-105.
Raphael Bossong and Mark Rhinard (October, 2016) “Theorizing Internal Security in the European Union”.
Fägersten, B. & Peters, D. (2016) The Migration Referendum in Hungary. UI Brief, No. 1, September, 2016.
The Institute of International Relations Prague is proud to announce that its director Petr Kratochvíl has been elected to the Board of the Trans European Policy Studies Association (TEPSA). Dr. Kratochvíl is the first representative of a Czech institution to become a member of the Board.
The Senior Researchers of the Institute of International Relations, Michal Šimečka and Vít Beneš, and researcher Jan Daniel participated in the conference “The Challenge of Migrants and Refugees in the European Union: Franco-Czech Perspectives” on October 14th. The event was held in Paris and was organized by the Sciences Po-Center for International Studies (CERI), Paris, in cooperation with the IIR and Charles University’s Faculty of Arts (CUFA).
The newest addition to the Institute of International Relations Prague’s team of researchers, Mark Galeotti, appeared as an honorary speaker at the Warsaw Security Forum on October 26th-28th. The Forum aimed at uniting various international security experts to discuss a wide variety of issues, ranging from the future of NATO to the EU’s Common Security and Defense Policy and energy security and relations with Russia. Dr. Galeotti delivered his remarks during the panel ‘Russia: A Global Colossus with Feet of Clay?’.
For the first time the Czech Republic will have its representative in the Board of the European Society of International Law (ESIL). ESIL is a non-partisan, non-profit organization of international law scholars aimed at promoting the study of international law. The 12th Annual Conference of the European Society of International Law took place on 8-11 September 2016 in Riga. During the conference, the coordinator of the Centre for International Law of the Institute of International Relations Prague, Veronika Bílková, was elected to the ESIL Board.
A Conference on “The Impact of US monetary policy on the Euro Area“, with Richard W. Fisher, President, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas was organised on 25 September, Rome.
A Closed-door seminar on “EU-Turkey Energy Cooperation in the Neighbourhood” was organised on 16 September, Rome.
A Seminar on “Serbia’s road to the EU“, with Tanja Miščević, Head of Negotiating Team for Accession of the Republic of Serbia to the EU was organised on 22 July, Rome
A Conference on “Tecnologia e innovazione per la difesa europea: riduzione delle spese militari e nuove sfide globali“, in cooperation with Avio Aero was organised on 11 July, Rome.
A video interview is available here.
A Seminar on “Verso una revisione della Strategia EU 2020: scenari ed opportunità future” was organised on 7 July, Rome. The Powerpoint presentation by A. Renda is available here.
A Seminar “The Unfulfilled promise: Completing the EU enlargement to the Balkans“, in cooperation with European Fund for the Balkans (EFB) was organised on 1 July, Rome.
A Seminar on: “Priorities of the Latvian Presidency of the EU“, with Edgars Rinkēvičs, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Latvia was organised on 30 June, Rome.
A Conference with L. Tsoukalis su “The Unhappy State of the Union: A new grand bargain for Europe“, in the framework of the series “The future of the European economy” was organised on 30 June, Rome. Click here for the conference video.
A Final conference of the project “Towards a more united and effective Europe” was organised on 27 June, Rome
Click kere for the conference videos, photos and report.
More information about the project can be found here.
Ten new reports on European Union by the Istituto Affari Internazionali – IAI, September-December 2016
Italy’s Role in Europe under Renzi, by Ettore Greco, (Documenti IAI 16|20) December 2016, 9 p.
The Renzi government has pursued two main and interconnected objectives within the EU: the defence and promotion of Italy’s role, not least in response to the ever-looming risk of marginalization; and the creation of new forms of integration and solidarity among member states, particularly in such sectors as the economy and migration, where vital national interests are at stake. However, Italy continues to find itself in a position of inherent weakness due to a series of persistent structural problems including massive public debt and a fragile banking system. There have been unprecedentedly sharp tensions with the European Commission and Germany on Italy’s compliance with the EU’s Stability and Growth Pact and other fiscal rules. In parallel, the Renzi government has continued to demand a redefinition of the EU’s economic priorities and strategy that, in addition to a greater flexibility on national budgetary policies, would allow for broader risk sharing and a more effective anti-cyclic effort at the European level. It has also advanced a number of proposals on migration, calling for a real collective management of the refugee crisis based on the principles of solidarity and a more equitable burden sharing. However, on both fronts – migration and economic policy – most of the reform plans have been frozen or remained a dead letter. This has contributed to fuelling anti-EU sentiments among the Italian public. The Renzi government has tried to cultivate preferential relations with Germany and France but a big three format is unlikely to consolidate into a group capable of providing effective leadership at the EU level given the growing complexities of the diplomatic game within the EU. In fact, the advancement of a credible reform agenda requires a broader agreement among Eurozone members.
Did 2016 Mark a New Start for EU External Migration Policy, or Was It Business as Usual? By Anja Palm, (Working paper 16|33) November 2016, 17 p.
2016 has been sold as the year of innovative EU external migration policies. Have recent EU decisions and initiatives in this field really represented a change in direction? This paper argues that the EU’s external migration policy has long been based on the principles of externalization of migration control and conditionality in the relationship with third countries. The securitization of the EU’s external borders has long existed along with the lack of adequate legal migration channels. This has come at the cost of the protection of migrants’ and especially refugees’ rights. The EU-Turkey agreement and the New Partnership Framework are examined in order to assess whether they represent a change of this trend or merely its latest manifestation. The paper concludes that, despite some clear steps forward in 2016, there is still much left to do in order to create a real framework of common external migration action which moves away from securitization and externalization towards a protection-sensitive entry system.
EUnited Against Crime: Improving Criminal Justice in European Union Cyberspace, by Tommaso de Zan & Simona Autolitano (eds.), (Documenti IAI 16|17) November 2016, 96 p.
In today’s ultra-connected world, much of our life occurs online. From watching TV series on Netflix, buying discounted airplane tickets on Kayak, to chatting with an old friend living in another continent on Facebook, it is hard to imagine a “disconnected” life. Despite the benefits generated by increased connectivity and more powerful processing tools, ICT systems have not only been employed to foster social and economic development. Terrorists and cybercriminals are increasingly using cyberspace to conduct their malfeasances. In June 2016, the Council of the European Union underlined the importance of improving the effectiveness of criminal justice in cyberspace. Using the Council conclusions as a starting point, the paper provides some “policy suggestions” for the ongoing debate taking place within EU institutions. In order to do so, the paper seeks to answer three main questions: What are the main challenges that EU member states face today when they collect e-evidence? How are they tackling these issues? Can an EU common framework provide solutions to solve these problems?
Mapping Member States’ Stances in a Post-Brexit European Union, by Eleonora Poli (IAI Working Papers 16|31) November 2016, 17 p.
During the 2016 Bratislava Summit, European Union member states concluded that although the UK vote to leave the EU is a serious matter, the EU can survive a British exit. Nonetheless, the current political atmosphere is one of deep unease. Brexit has exacerbated a general European malaise, highlighting member states’ struggle in reaching agreement when dealing with EU matters. This will have a fundamental impact on future negotiations with Britain. To date, while countries are afraid that public opinion might support exit referenda at national levels – especially if EU institutions negotiate too “soft” a deal with the UK – their ideas regarding a British exit agreement are not always aligned. In an attempt to foresee the UK-EU negotiating pattern, this paper will map the member states’ views, which the EU should take into consideration while discussing the exit deal with the UK.
European Security Governance and Transatlantic Relations, by Matteo Brunelli, (Documenti IAI 16|15) November 2016, 12 p.
The Middle East and North Africa are in turmoil, Europe’s security is inextricably linked to what happens in this region, and yet the EU has limited capacities to change realities on the ground. These are three of the main messages of the EU Global Strategy presented in June 2016. The document presents Europeans and the wider world with a vision on the international context in which the EU will operate in the coming years. It depicts a complex, contested and connected world, where the EU’s strategic interests must be coherent with its values. It also espouses the concept of principled pragmatism as a guide for the EU’s external action in the years ahead and mentions the concept of resilience more than forty times. The strategy acknowledges that the EU is not alone, that it needs to partner to be influential and that it has an interest in promoting cooperative regional orders. In the framework of the MENARA project, let’s launch a discussion on what could be the practical implications of this new vision for EU policies in the Middle East and North Africa in the next decade.
The Future of EU-Turkey Relations: Between Mutual Distrust and Interdependency, by Bilge Yabanci, (FEUTURE paper no. 3) November 2016, 37 p.
This paper aims to assess the significance of Brexit for the future of the UK as a unitary state and to identify various possible outcome to the future of the UK. The first part provides an overview of the current status of Scotland and Northern Ireland in the UK and the differences between both cases. The second part of the article assesses the significance of the EU for the devolved administrations and analyses key party responses to the Brexit debate in Scotland and Northern Ireland. In conclusion the impact of Brexit on the future of the UK as unitary state is assessed.
The EU’s Struggle with Normative Leadership in Sub-Saharan Africa, by Bernardo Venturi, (IAI Working Papers 16|29) November 2016, 20 p.
This paper provides an overview of the European Union’s relations with Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) in the fields of peace and security and of development cooperation. Africa and Europe are close neighbours and the EU has a strong interest in strengthening relations with SSA countries and organisations. The EU’s complex and multi-layered development cooperation in Africa is presented analysing the main agreements and some critical issues, such as the link with trade liberalisation over development or conditionality to incentivise democratic governance. At the same time, addressing the instability of the African continent represents a major concern for EU Member States, as they are experiencing its repercussions in terms of irregular immigration, drugs, arms and human trafficking, terrorism and organised crime. The main strategic strands and tools of the EU as a peace and security provider in Africa are presented and analysed. On the basis of the most recent trends in the EU’s development and security relations with SSA, the paper formulates a series of policy recommendations for the EU and the US on how to engage in SSA, also triangulating with other global powers.
Mapping Periods and Milestones of Past EU-Turkey Relations, by Hanna-Lisa Hauge, et. al., (FEUTURE paper no. 2) September 2016, 24 p.
This Working Paper aims to embed FEUTURE’s analysis of drivers of EU-Turkey relations in a historical context. It does so by outlining and discussing several narratives which represent influential interpretations of EU-Turkey relations at different times in history. It is argued that narratives on EU-Turkey relations became increasingly competitive in the course of time, both within EU and Turkey as well as between them. The paper maps these changes of narratives in light of different historical milestones and phases. The periodization also serves to outline trends of conflict, cooperation and convergence as manifested in the political discourse. Thereby, the paper also serves as starting point for the ensuing qualitative analysis of a vast set of sources, representing the debates in Turkey and the EU.
Turkey and the European Union: Scenarios for 2023, by Nathalie Tocci, (FEUTURE paper no. 1) September 2016, 16 p.
FEUTURE – Future of EU-TUrkey RElations – analyses the past, present and future drivers of the EU-Turkey relationship. In order to navigate the possible future, a compass is necessary. This paper establishes this compass by imagining, delineating and systematizing three reference scenarios in order to organize subsequent research and eventually map out a most likely “feuture”. Drawing from Schwartz, the aim of these scenarios is to construct different pathways that might exist in future, suggesting and informing appropriate scholarly analysis or policy decisions that may be taken along those possible paths. Several conditions are proposed for the realisation of possible conflictual, cooperational or converging futures, taking into consideration forms of differentiated integration relating to these ideal-type scenarios.
The International Spectator, Vol. 51, No.3, September 2016
The Global Strategy for the European Union’s Foreign and Security Policy, “Shared Vision, Common Action: A Stronger Europe”, presented at the European Council on 24 June 2016 by Federica Mogherini, High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy and Vice President of the Commission, was drafted by Nathalie Tocci, Deputy Director of the Istituto Affari Internazionali (IAI) and co-editor of The International Spectator. Given the importance of the document, we asked Nathalie for an interview and 18 foreign policy experts from around the world to comment on it.
On Thursday, 27 October 2016, the Department of EU International Relations and Diplomacy Studies at the College of Europe will celebrate its first ten years.
This event primarily aims at the alumni and students of the College of Europe but is also open to the wider public (online registration required by Monday 24 October at 12:00 noon).
Draft programme (more details will become available soon):
9:30: Welcome by Prof. Dr. Sieglinde GSTÖHL, Director, Department of EU International Relations and Diplomacy Studies
9:45: Roundtable discussion “EU International Relations and Diplomacy Studies: Past, Present, Future” with alumni of the ten past promotions (from Copernicus to Chopin)
11:00: Coffee break
11:30: Introduction of the laureate Prof. Dr. Dieter MAHNCKE, Visiting Professor at the College of Europe for 40 years and founding Director of the Department of EU International Relations and Diplomacy Studies, by Prof. Dr. Olivier COSTA, Director, Department of European Political and Administrative Studies
11:45: Honorary lecture by Prof. Dr. Dieter MAHNCKE, “What’s Wrong with the European Union?”
12:30: Conferral of the title of Honorary Professor to Prof. Dr. Dieter MAHNCKE by the Rector of the College of Europe, Prof. Dr. Dr. Jörg MONAR
12:45: Lunch buffet
Dieter MAHNCKE has been visiting professor at the College of Europe for forty years (1976-2016). During this time, he was also Alfried Krupp von Bohlen und Halbach Chair for European Foreign Policy and Security Studies (1996-2010), Director of the Department of European Political and Administrative Studies (1996-2008) and founding Director of the Department of EU International Relations and Diplomacy Studies (2006-2010). Among his previous professional affiliations are the University of the Armed Forces in Hamburg, the Office of the German Federal President and the German Federal Ministry of Defence. He holds a BA from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, an MA and PhD from the School of Advanced International Studies, Johns Hopkins University, in Washington, DC, and a Habilitation from the University of Bonn.
More information can be found here.
The Swedish Institute of International Affairs (UI) and the Swedish Ministry for Foreign Affairs, arranged a seminar focusing on the countries which are part of the EU:s Eastern Partnership: Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Moldova, and Ukraine.
What is the current political and economic development in these countries? What is the role of the EU and Russia in the region, and how does the Eastern Partnership influence EU-Russia relations?
This was the first seminar of three, highlighting that it has been 25 years since the fall of the USSR and examining how developments in the former Soviet republics have taken different directions.
The Swedish Institute of International Affairs (UI) arranged a seminar on the topic of “Future of European Security – Role of the EU”.
The last months have seen multiple suggestions on how to strengthen the security and defense polices of the EU, especially following UK’s Brexit vote. What role could the EU have in the provision of security and safety of its citizens? The Union is now equipped with a new global strategy but how can it be implemented and what role will the big EU members play?
On the occasion of the visit to Sweden of Federica Mogherini, High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy and Vice-President of the Commission, the Swedish Institute of International Affairs (UI), together with the Swedish Foreign Ministry and the European Commission Representation in Sweden arranged a public seminar about the global challenges facing the European Union and the global strategies towards a more secure neighbourhood.
An article about the seminar is available here.
7 October 2016, Ceremonial Hall, University of Iceland
The University of Iceland and the City of Reykjavik launched Höfði Reykjavik Peace Centre on October 7 2016. The opening seminar entitled Rethinking Peace and Power was held in the Ceremonial Hall of the University of Iceland, with opening remarks by Mr. Guðni Th. Jóhannesson, President of Iceland.
Steve Killelea, Founder & Executive Chairman of the Institute for Economics and Peace and author of the Global Peace Index and Annika Bergman Rosamond, Senior Lecturer at the Department of Political Science, Lund University, gave the keynote addresses. Jón Atli Benediktsson, Rector of the University of Iceland, Lilja Alfreðsdóttir, Minister for Foreign Affairs and Dagur B. Eggertsson, Mayor of the City of Reykjavik, also addressed the seminar.
Amongst other speakers were Michele Acuto, Professor in Diplomacy and Urban Theory at University College London and Melanie Greenberg, President and CEO of Alliance for Peacebuilding.
Conference: “Reykjavik Summit: 30th Anniversary”
8 October 2016, Ceremonial Hall, University of Iceland
On October 8 HÖFÐI Reykjavík Peace Centre organized a conference that was dedicated to the commemoration of the 1986 summit meeting of presidents Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev, a historical event that marked the beginning of the end of the Cold War. Amongst speakers were Ms. Vigdís Finnbogadóttir, former President of Iceland, Lilja Alfreðsdóttir, Minister for Foreign Affairs and Dagur B. Eggertsson, Mayor of Reykjavík. In addition, UN Secretary General, Ban Ki-Moon, gave a special address at the conference.
Conference: “25 Years Nordic-Baltic Cooperation”
26 September 2016, Nordic House, Reykjavik, Iceland
In 1991, the three Baltic countries, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, regained their independence following the democratic wave that swept across the region. 25 years later, the Nordic-Baltic cooperation is a well-established priority for all the states in question. Speakers at this conference included foreign ministers from the three Baltic countries and Iceland, and Mr. Guðni Th. Jóhannesson, President of Iceland.
The regular club meeting will host Mr. Daniel Schraad-Tischler and Christian Kroll experts of the Bertelsmann Foundation who will present two recent reports (namely “Sustainable Governance Indicators” and “EU Social Justice”).
The guest of this special event will be Dr. László Andor, outgoing Commissioner for Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion. Mr. Andor will dedicate his speech to the big topic of „Europe after the Crisis”.
Lecture by Professor Ludger Kühnhardt, Director of the Research Centre for European Integration at the University of Bonn, entitled “The European Union after the elections and ahead of new challenges”. The professor’s thought-provoking presentation was followed by a lively debate about Europe’s future, including special issues for Germany and Hungary.
25 September 2014, CEU Centre for EU Enlargement Studies, Budapest
Presentation by senior researcher of IWE, András Deák at Panel III. – Pipelines, plants and European energy networks: dealing with dependency.
18 September 2014, Prague
In the above indicated panel senior researchers of IWE, Andrea Éltető and Ágnes Szunomár gave a presentation on “Trade and investment between the Visegrad and Northeast Asian countries with a special emphasis on China and Hungary”
Contribution by senior researcher of IWE, András Deák, expert in energy matters with special regard to Russia.
At this conference senior researcher of IWE, Katalin Völgyi delivered a presentation on “Economic regionalism and FDI inflows in the ASEAN region”
At the latest event senior researcher of IWE, István Kőrösi gave an introductory lecture on “The renewability of social market economy in the midst of the challenges of the 21st century” followed by an unusually long debate (in Hungarian).
Senior researcher of IWE, András Deák made a presentation at this international expert seminar.
To this big international event, hosted by the Corvinus University Budapest, five researchers of IWE contributed with a presentation, namely Andrea Éltető, Ágnes Orosz, Miklós Szanyi, Ágnes Szunomár and Csaba Weiner.
Senior researcher of IWE, Ágnes Szunomár contributed to this event with a presentation.
Lecture by Dr. Szabolcs Fazakas, Hungarian member of the European Court of Auditors in Luxembourg. Mr. Fazakas gave a very interesting, first-hand insight into the recent publication entitled “Special Report on the establishment of the European External Action Service” prepared by the European Court of Auditors.
IRMO is a partner on the Interreg Central Europe project RESTAURA ‘’Revitalising Historic buildings through Public-Private Partnership Schemes’’ (6/2016 – 5/2019). The project is coordinated by the Nowy Dwor Mazowiecki, Poland while IRMO participates as one of the nine project partners from 4 CE countries (Poland, Slovakia, Slovenia and Croatia). The lack of financial resources of most of the governments remains one of the main burning problems in the protection and maintenance of a large number of neglected or abandoned historic buildings in Central Europe region. With limited public resources (national and EU funds), the involvement of private financing and expertise through PPP is the only alternative to save and manage the unique built heritage of Central Europe, and the project RESTAURA is willing to give a real change in the use of PPP across Central Europe. RESTAURA is aiming at identifying, testing, evaluating and promoting good practice on Public-Private Partnership in revitalization of historical cities and buildings. The outputs of the project will be strategies and action plans, tools, pilot actions and workshops for public authorities willing to renovate and bring a new life to abandoned and deteriorated historic buildings with the use of PPP models. In each of these countries a mix of public and private institutions participate to jointly develop and implement project’s outputs in a topic, that is still very new to EU Member States from Central Europe, and transnational exchange of experience is needed. Leader of the IRMO team is Daniela Angelina Jelinčić, PhD. For more information about the project activities visit RESTAURA website and IRMO website.
IRMO in cooperation with the European Commission Representation in the Republic of Croatia and Josip Juraj Strossmayer University of Osijek organized a round table “The European dimension of the employment policy in Croatia – how to decrease youth unemployment?”. The event was held on 28th October 2016 in the hall of the Rectorate of Josip Juraj Strossmayer University in Osijek, Croatia. The round table was organised within the Jean Monnet support to institutions project ‘POLO-Cro28 – Policy Observatory in Croatia’ financed by the Erasmus+ program and implemented by IRMO. The panellists discussed trends and initiatives of the employment policies in the EU and Croatia, notably the effectiveness of the Youth Guarantee initiative, launched by the EU, and its implementation in Croatia. Furthermore, harmonisation of the education system with the labour market needs, transition paths from education to work as well as the role of informal education and volunteering were also discussed. The speakers were representatives of the EC Representation in Croatia, experts from Croatian state administration, researchers from Croatia, as well as representatives of Croatian social partners and civil society. The coordinator of the POLO-Cro28 project is Prof. Visnja Samardzija.
The University of Iceland and the City of Reykjavik launched Höfði Reykjavik Peace Centre on October 7, 2016. The opening seminar entitled Rethinking Peace and Power was held in the Ceremonial Hall of the University of Iceland, with opening remarks by Guðni Th. Jóhannesson, President of Iceland. Amongst other participants at the opening seminar were keynote speakers, Steve Killelea, Founder & Executive Chairman of the Institute for Economics and Peace and author of the Global Peace Index and Annika Bergman Rosamond, Senior Lecturer at the Department of Political Science, Lund University.
HÖFÐI Reykjavík Peace Centre is run under the auspices of the Institute of International Affairs at the University of Iceland and is a forum for international multidisciplinary cooperation, with an emphasis on the role of small states, cities and citizens in promoting peace. Reykjavik has placed great emphasis on human rights and peace in its work and policies. The launching of HÖFÐI Reykjavik Peace Centre at the University of Iceland is thus an important next step in Reykjavík’s mission of becoming a city of peace. The Peace Centre will promote non-violent communications, the eradication of interpersonal violence and peaceful relations between states and organizations. Additionally, it will promote peace through research and education, including the development of a graduate programme in peace and conflict studies at the University of Iceland.
HÖFÐI Reykjavík Peace Centre will carry out diverse projects during the first years of its operation, such as an analysis and action plan against hate speech to be utilized in raising awareness on the issue. Among other important projects of HÖFÐI Reykjavík Peace Centre is the development of a four‐day summer school for children of diverse origin, where they will learn from each other the importance of peaceful communication and constructive dialogue, in an interactive environment.
The creation of HÖFÐI Reykjavík Peace Centre provides the Institute of International Affairs with the opportunity of expanding its research areas that will lead to a greater emphasis on the challenges now facing modern societies, such as climate change, immigration and refugee issues, increased diversity, as well as rising nationalism and populism in the mainstream discourse. HÖFÐI Reykjavík Peace Centre will also organise open seminars at the University of Iceland, focused on the role of cities, small states and citizens in promoting peace. To promote the different research fields within the Institute, an annual international conference will be organised in collaboration with local and international partners, bringing together different actors in a dialogue on current international affairs and issues related to peace.
The Centre for Small State Studies awarded an Erasmus+ grant
The Centre for Small State Studies at the University of Iceland was recently awarded a grant from the European Union’s Erasmus+ programme – the total amount is 238.000 euros. The project focuses on a strategic partnership between higher education institutions and will last for two years. The University of Iceland is the lead partner, with nine other universities participating in the project: The University of Copenhagen, Vilnius University, Tallinn University of Technology, University of St. Andrews, the University of Malta, Queen Mary University of London, University of Ljubljana, Lund University and Comenius University in Bratislava. The Centre for Small State Studies is run under the auspices of the Institute of International Affairs at the University of Iceland.
Pia Hansson, Director of the Centre for Small State Studies, Tómas Joensen, Project Manager at the Centre for Small State Studies and Baldur Þórhallsson, Professor of Political Science at the University of Iceland developed the project and are in charge of its implementation on behalf of the University of Iceland in cooperation with academics from the other nine universities. During the next two years the ten higher education institutions will develop close cooperation in the field of small state studies. The grant will be used to develop teaching in small state studies within the partner universities, as well as to organize summer schools, seminars, and to develop curriculums in small state studies for higher education.
The Erasmus+ grant is a great acknowledgment of the work carried out by the Centre for Small State Studies, which has specialised in the role of small states in Europe. In 2013, the Centre was awarded a Centre of Excellence grant from the European Union and has operated as a Jean Monnet Centre of Excellence since then. The centre furthermore received an Erasmus+ grant in 2014 for a project that ended successfully in August this year. The Centre for Small State Studies has organized an annual summer school since 2003 and recently received an award of excellence from Erasmus+ for the project.
The Centre for Arctic Policy Studies at the Arctic Circle
The Centre for Arctic Policy Studies participated in the Arctic Circle Assembly held in Reykjavík 7-9 October. The Centre organized two breakout sessions and a workshop. The first breakout session was on Arctic university cities and focused on the crucial role of cities in fighting climate change, the need for various actors to come together and share knowledge, experiences and best practices. Arctic university cities make an interesting case to explore as they are often isolated, dependent on natural resources, and particularly vulnerable to the impact of climate change. The other breakout session and the workshop were a part of a project supported by NOS-HS. The project titled Northgate is a series of three workshops focusing on the sociocultural aspects of climate change in the North Atlantic Gateway to the Arctic. The theme of the workshop and the breakout session was movement of people in the Northern regions, looking at different reasons for the movement and migration, ranging from climate refugees to tourism.
This conference was organised for the occasion of the 50th Anniversary of the European Studies Institute, ULB. It took place on 29th April at the European Studies Institute, Free University Brussels.
The 7th European Congress of Jurists specialised in Immigration and Asylum took place in Brussels on 8 and 9 April 2014. This edition was devoted to the 2nd generation of asylum instruments adopted on 26 June 2013 and proposed to the audience:
– a “vertical” approach of each instrument by a general report presenting the novelties and measuring the progress accomplished towards more harmonisation;
– a “horizontal” approach of key questions analysed throughout all the instruments to evaluate their coherence by a panel of experts after each report.
The final session assessed the progress towards a CEAS (Common European Asylum System) as we argued that it is not finalised in view of the strategic guidelines adopted in June by the European Council to follow up the Stockholm programme.
Odysseus has mobilised all its members in the 28 Member States together with the best experts of asylum law in Europe and high-level practitioners from the EU institutions and the EASO, Member States’ administrations and representatives of UNHCR and NGOs. Many of them have been personally involved in the negotiations of the new asylum legislations. This congress will therefore be a unique opportunity to better understand the legal and political developments of asylum in the EU and to network with the numerous people who will attend.
On 27 November IWE and the Central European University (CEU) hosted a conference in Budapest, entitled Chinese investment and financial engagement in Visegrad countries. The conference, supported by the International Visegrad Fund, provided insight into Chinese investments in Visegrad countries before and after the crisis. In addition to the economic issues, the conference focused on the underlying political interests of both sides, while chances for possible cooperation among V4 countries were also be touched upon, too. Speakers at the conference included Prof. Dr. Guenter Heiduk, director of the East Asian Center at the Warsaw School of Economics, Dr. Lucia Husinecová, director of Institute of Asian Studies and Dr. Song Lilei, assistant director of the Center of European Studies at the Tongji University and Ágnes Szunomár (senior researcher of IWE). More information on the event coupled with several publications on the topic can be found here.
Club Europe, 18 November 2014, Budapest.
Presentation of the annual report of the Hungarian European Business Council on “Sustainable and inclusive growth”.
12 November 2014, Danube University Krems, Austria. Keynote speech by Prof. András Inotai on “Possibilities of and limits to the European Union’s Danube Region Strategy”
24 October 2014, Cityhotel, Kiev. Two IWE senior researchers contributed to this event: András Deák and Sándor Meisel
22 October 2014, Beijing. Introductory remarks by Prof. András Inotai on Global Economic Governance and the place and role of the European Union
22 October 2014, Beijing. Introductory remarks by Prof. András Inotai on Global Economic Governance and the place and role of the European Union
22 October 2014, International Visegrad Fund, Bratislava. Gábor Túry (researcher at IWE) presented the main findings of the multiannual project, led by him, entitled: Prospects of the Visegrad cooperation in changing economic, political and social conditions
21 October 2014, Beijing. Presentation by Prof. András Inotai on “Strong and weak features of the European integration in the changing global framework”
20-21 October 2014, ELTE (Eötvös Loránd University), Budapest – Contribution of IWE researchers to this event:
Annamária Artner (senior researcher) “Brazil in the global system of capital accumulation”
Judit Ricz (visiting researcher) “The Brazilian developer state: past, present and future”
Ágnes Solti (junior researcher): “About Brazil’s aid policy vis-à-vis Latin-America and Africa”
Presentation of two recent Bertelsmann Foundation studies (“Sustainable Governance Indicators” and “Social Justice in the EU”) by Dr. Daniel Schraad-Tischler and Dr. Christian Kroll, project managers, Bertelsmann Foundation
At this event outgoing European Commissioner, Dr. László Andor gave a presentations about the social aspects of a post-crisis Europe
9-10 October 2014, National Defence University, Washington DC. Tamás Novák (senior researcher of IWE) contributed with a presentation to the event dedicated to the Western Balkans, organised by the Defence Intelligence Agency
6 October 2014, Klosterneuburg/Vienna. Panel discussion on “Crisis management required?” (Krisenmanagement gefragt?) with the participation of among others Dr. Erhard Busek and Prof. András Inotai
2 October 2014, Budapest
At the October event senior researcher of IWE, Zsuzsánna Biedermann gave an introductory lecture on “Dark pools, non-public trading and regulatory dilemmas of our time” followed by a lively debate (in Hungarian).
Lecture by Prof. Dr. Ludger Kühnhardt, director of the Research Center for European Integration (Zentrum für Europaeische Integrationsforschung – ZEI) at the University of Bonn. The professor gave a lecture on “The European Union after the elections and ahead of new challenges” followed by a long discussion.
Marko Lovec, European Union’s Common Agricultural Policy Reforms, September 2016
This book engages in the controversies of the European Union’s Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) reforms, demonstrating how these are reiterated by mainstream theoretical approaches in the field.
In the special issue of Theory and Practice (orig. Teorija in praksa) you will find several papers by members of the Centre of International Relations. The papers in the journal focus on the impact of stereotypes on political as well as economic cooperation between Ex-Yugoslav countries 25 years after its turbulent disaggregation.
Metka Stare, Role of Services in Global Value Chains, December 2016
Metka Stare from the Centre of International Relations recently published a monograph on the ‘Role of Services in Global Value Chains’ in which she addressed the lack of a holistic approach to studying services. The focus of her book is thus on characteristics of pure service value chains, where services and/or service functions master the entire value chain. The analysis of the patterns of five companies‘ integration into GVCs allows to identify the key functions in the business process that create the highest value added. This serves as the basis to discuss the suitability of the conceptual approach for studying the global value chains in manufacturing for services global value chains. In addition, the main benefits, barriers and risks of company‘s engagement in GVCs are uncovered and a distinction made between those within own GVCs compared to those when collaborating in other companies‘ GVCs.
The monography brings new findings and contributes to deepening the knowledge on services role in global value chains from the perspective of theoretical and conceptual approach, as well as from the perspective of relevance for the design of business strategies and economic policies that may contribute to improving the position of Slovenian service companies in global value chains.
Barcelona, 27 June – 1 July 2016
Over the course of this Summer School the main aspects and challenges of economic integration, the aftermath of the financial crisis, and regional and urban development strategies will be discussed and analysed using real life business cases.
Additionally, the way in which territories can steer their own economic destiny and boost growth through dedicated policies and drivers, while at the same time enhancing territorial cohesion and making smart use of the available EU supportive resources will be illustrated. This will be achieved again by using examples – in particular, results-orientated good practices that make use of different EU funds.
This practical and interactive programme will conclude with an examination of seven steps to achieve public management excellence as a basis for territories’ competitiveness and success.
This annual Summer School is a unique opportunity for participants to exchange with and learn from leading-edge experiences and to receive practical instruments and advice.
For more information, please have a look at the programme and registration form.
Elcano Royal Institute – 15.09.2016
The EU leaders meeting in Bratislava on 16 September face a challenging, not to say hostile, environment. Responding to people’s fundamental concerns will simultaneously help member states and enhance the value of the EU for its citizens.
Luis Simón – 20.09.2016
As Europeans struggle to get through an economic and political crisis that is shaking the foundations of European integration, security-related concerns have returned to the center stage of political debate.
Lara Lázaro and Mario Esteban – 03.10.2016
Although much remains to be done by China to set the world on a climate-bearable path, China’s efforts are significant and its ratification of the Paris Agreement ahead of the G-20 meeting is a key step for the entry into force of Kyoto’s successor.
Luis Simón – 07.10.2016
All the media noise about the possible implications of an eventual British exit from the EU (Brexit)should not stand in the way of a much-needed reassessment of the strategic potential offered by stronger bilateral ties between Spain and the UK.
Gustav Lindstrom – 13.10.2016
Missile defence in Europe is evolving and maturing, even if it this is occurring at the margins of public debate. At the same time, there are perceptions that the missile threat is growing. A more sophisticated approach towards missile defence in Europe is required.
William Chislett – 14.11.2016
The EU’s report on Turkey’s progress in meeting the conditions to become a full member is so critical that it begs the question whether the two sides should consider abandoning the accession process.
William Chislett – 21.09.2016
Spain receives 2% of the refugees it agreed to accept.
Clock starts ticking towards third election in a year.
Rajoy ups growth forecast, warns of consequences of political deadlock.
Ferrovial enters Chilean electricity sector.
William Chislett – 17.10.2016
Spain’s call for Britain to share sovereignty of Gibraltar rebuffed.
Socialists in crisis, soul searching over allowing a new Popular Party government.
Three former Popular Party treasurers in macro corruption trial.
Spain continues to overshoot budget deficit target.
William Chislett – 28.11.2016
Spain back in the international arena, Merkel applauds Rajoy.
New Popular Party (PP) minority government faces many challenges.
European Commission downgrades growth forecast, making fiscal deficit reduction more
Ferrovial wins €300m high-speed train contract in UK.
Expert Comments & Others
Karel de Gucht – 13.10.2016
Instead of singing the praises of integration in new and challenging policy fields, the EU should focus on consolidating and strengthening those policy fields in which it does best, on the daily problems of its citizens, and delivering tangible results.
Gonzalo Escribano – 19.10.2016
Low oil prices seem to have slightly shifted Algerian political economy balances, making economic (and energy) reform more attractive. Both the EU and the US should explore this window of opportunity.
William Chislett – 26.10.2016
Spain’s minority Popular Party (PP) government, which will be voted in by parliament before the end of October after a 10-month limbo period following inconclusive elections last December and June, has a lot on its plate.
Salvador Llaudes – 11.11.2016
In the likely case that the Supreme Court confirms the decision of the British justice, a rebellion of deputies against the Brexit is not expected.
Ulrich Speck – 11.11.2016
To alienate the next US President is unwise, as it will harm European interests. Instead, Europe must try to influence Trump’s policies and his decision-making by engaging with him. And it must start to work on a plan B.
Richard Higgot – 14.11.2016
The future of the global trade regime depends on educating Trump and his supporters that free trade is an opportunity, not a risk, and that the WTO is still the best place to secure the norms of an open liberal trade system.
Miguel Otero-Iglesias – 21.11.2016
Despite recent tensions, the Euro has created deep ties that go beyond economic cooperation and are integral to European identity.
Salvador Llaudes – 07.12.2016
Spain finally has a government. How will the country now play its cards in the international arena, especially in the EU post-Brexit? And will the new role of the Parliament be useful for Spanish foreign policy?
Andrés Ortega – 20.09.2016
The general discourse of political leaders can carry weight. But as Angela Merkel is experiencing, the discourses of courage are no guarantee of success.
Andrés Ortega – 27.09.2016
English is deeply rooted in the institutions of the EU and this is not about to change, whether Brexit finally comes to pass or not.
Paul Isbell – 27.09.2016
The polls had been tightening all through the month leading up to last night’s US Presidential Election Debate at Hofstra University in New York between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, the respective Democratic and Republican Party nominees.
Paul Isbell – 03.10.2016
A week after the first presidential debate in the US, and just over a month before the election on November 8th, the Clinton-Trump election remains tight.
Andrés Ortega – 04.10.2016
The next few months could be decisive for the electoral scenarios in Europe. There will be elections in Italy, Austria, the Netherlands, France and Germany.
Alexander Görlach – 05.10.2016
German’s fear is exploited by a new right wing. The Alternative for Germany and the PEGIDA movement march against refugees and Islam.
Paul Isbell – 10.10.2016
As a result of Trump’s stumblings in both the social and foreign policy terrains, a number of high level Republican leaders have recently abandoned him.
Andrés Ortega – 11.10.2016
The decline of the middle classes in the west could be behind the growth of populism in a large number of societies, but what is the truth of the matter?
Nikole Hyndman – 13.10.2016
Justin Trudeau shows great promise as a leader, but with Trudeau’s incessant good press, critical voices are not being heard.
Andrés Ortega – 18.10.2016
After six years, the situation in Syria has become a world war on a small, concentrated scale, although with terrible consequences for its inhabitants.
Paul Isbell – 20.10.2016
Hillary Clinton appears to have pulled out of the final turn of the long campaign well before, and at a faster rate than Donald Trump.
Andrés Ortega – 25.10.2016
Some people believe that Europe is undergoing a process of Balkanisation, although the continent’s regionalisation might in fact be something positive.
Andrés Ortega – 02.11.2016
Recently, both protectionist voices and measures have been on the increase. Even investments are not immune to the new protectionism.
Andrés Ortega – 08.11.2016
Although Russia knows that it is needed to resolve many global problems, the country has shrunk in comparison with the US and China.
Paul Isbell – 08.11.2016
The election contest remains tight and still potentially volatile. In any case, a deep challenge of national unity will remain, regardless of who wins.
Andrés Ortega – 15.11.2016
The election of Donald Trump as US President, hard on the heels of the Brexit referendum, has forced Europe to confront another mirror.
Iliana Olivié – 21.11.2016
Globalization has been a major issue in two of the most important recent campaigns in Western countries: the Brexit referendum and the US Elections.
Andrés Ortega – 22.11.2016
The US presidential elections have shown that democracy has changed, and the means of obtaining victory, too.
Andrés Ortega – 29.11.2016
Donald Trump may well be the President of a certain US withdrawal and bilateralisation. Bilateralism may become his trademark.
Andrés Ortega – 07.12.2016
It would be a mistake to say that Italy has voted against Europe, even though the decision may have European consequences.
3 and 15 November 2016, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Ljubljana, Slovenia
On 3 and 15 November 2016, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Ljubljana hosted two Directorate-General for Neighbourhood and Enlargement Negotiations (DG NEAR) sponsored events on Europeanization of Western Balkans (WB). Nearly 30 participants, predominantly MA and BA students of European Studies and International Relations, but also interested policy makers, representatives of the national Chamber of Commerce and civil society representatives working in the field of innovation and industrial policy, cooperated in two separate 3,5-hour round tables with dynamic Q&A sessions.
The first round table entitled ‘Advantages and Challenges in the Two-Way Europeanization Path in the Western Balkans’ was focused on the EU enlargement and two paths of Europeanization of WB states, namely downloading as adaptation and policy convergence and uploading as national projection to the EU level.
Speakers at the roundtable included:
The discussion was moderated by Assoc. Prof. Dr. Ana Bojinović Fenko from the Centre of International Relations, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Ljubljana.
The second roundtable concerning the ‘Advantages and Challenges for the National Innovation System in Building a Competitive Industrial Strategy’ took place approximately 2 weeks later. The speakers at this discussion were:
The debate at the round table was moderated by Professor Dr Andreja Jaklič from the Centre of International Relations, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Ljubljana.
9 November 2016, Faculty of Social Sciences, Ljubljana
Participants to the round table, that was chaired by prof. dr. Maja Bučar, head of the Centre for International Relations (CIR) of the Faculty of Social Sciences, included: mag. Paul Schmidt, Secretary General of the Austrian Association for European Politics (Österreichische Gesellschaft für Europapolitik – ÖGfE), dr. Neža Kogovšek Šalamon, director of the Peace Institute, Helena Milinković, journalist at RTV Slovenia and dr. Milan Brglez, President of the National Assembly of the Republic of Slovenia and Assistant Professor in International Relations. The roundtable was organised as part of the international project ‘Cooperation or Confrontation between Central European Countries in the Current Refugee Crisis’, coordinated by ÖGfE, in which, apart from Slovenia and CIR, partners from Czech Republic, Slovakia and Hungary are also participating. So far, within the project national workshops, followed by a joint workshop and presentation of results in Vienna, took place. Currently, results are being presented and discussed in each of the participating countries.
The joint policy recommendations and response by European media are available here.
The annual DSE conferences provide a unique setting for EU and European studies scholars from Denmark and beyond to discuss new research, meet colleagues and engage with the topic of Europe and European integration.
This anniversary edition will also feature more festive activities including a high-level debate on current European affairs open to the public and presentation of a festschrift celebrating the DSE and Denmark’s relationship with the EU.
The conference will be co-hosted by the Department of Political Science at the University of Copenhagen and the Danish Institute for International Studies on 6-7 October 2016.
It is often claimed that renationalization can be understood both as a central problem and key solution facing Europe at this juncture, but is this accurate? The past year has revealed deep cracks in the foundations of the European project, exemplified not least by the re-introduction of border controls and the rise of nationalist parties across the continent. Two separate countries in very different circumstances have come so close to leaving the European Union that Grexit and Brexit now are household terms. Simultaneously, there have been renewed calls for national parliamentary controls over the EU policy process amid a European legitimacy crises, centered not least on the inability of EU institutions to deal with a multitude of diverse crises and a resurgence of intergovernmental decision-making structures. In the wake of the economic crisis, even the ‘unstoppable’ trend of financial globalization was reversed and most strongly so in Europe. Is renationalization the best concept to understand these developments?
This year will feature a keynote address by Frank Schimmelfennig, Professor of European Politics at ETH Zurich, who has published extensively in leading journals on European integration and, more specifically, on differentiated integration, EU enlargement and democratization. The topic of the keynote will be “European integration in times of crisis.”
More information can be found on the conference website.
21.09.2016 – Seminar ‘’Energy Perspectives in Europe and the United States following the COP21’’. Organized by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce in Spain (AmChamSpain) and Elcano Royal Institute. A conference with the goal of analyzing energy prospects in Europe and the U.S. in light of COP21 in Paris.
24.10.2016 – Debate ‘’USA 2016: an atypical electoral process’’. Organized by Elcano Royal Institute and Fundación Botín. Participants in the debate: Brian Baird, former member of the House of Representatives (Democratic Party), Dan Miller, former member of the House of Representatives (Republican Party), Paul Isbell, Senior Fellow at the Center for Transatlantic Relations, Johns Hopkins University SAIS, Carlota García Encina, Elcano Royal Institute Analyst. Moderated by Charles Powell, Director of the Elcano Royal Institute.
03.11.2016 – Roundtable ‘’European Security after Brexit’’. Organized by Elcano Royal Institute and Ifri. Speakers: Nicolás Pascual de la Parte, Permanent Representative of Spain to the PSC, H. E. Pierre Sellal, Permanent Representative of France to the EU, Thomas Gomart, Ifri, and Charles Powell, Director of the Elcano Royal Institute.
15.11.2016 – Forum ‘’4th Elcano Forum on Global Terrorism: Prevention of Violent Radicalization, De-radicalization and Terrorist Rehabilitation’’. Organized by Elcano Royal Institute with the participation of the US Embassy in Madrid, International Institute, and American Space Madrid. The forum focused on substantive knowledge and critical assessment of practical experiences about prevention of violent radicalization, as well as initiatives aiming at de-radicalization and rehabilitation. Speakers included academic experts, local leaders, and specialized practitioners from Spain, France, Belgium, Sweden, United States, Israel, Morocco and Singapore.
29 – 30.11.2016 – Seminar: ‘’Spain and Israel. Dialogue and perspectives’’. Organized by Elcano Royal Institute, Embassy of Israel to Spain, Centro Sefarad Israel, and Universidad de Vitoria. A seminar dedicated to the history, analysis, and future of Hispano-Israeli relations in the broad sense.
Mercator European Dialogue – EU strategic vision workshop
26 February 2016, Rome
Workshop hosted by IAI in the framework of the Mercator European Dialogue project. In an ever more complex and connected world, defining a common strategic vision for the EU as a global actor has become an urgent priority. In this context, the European Council has mandated the High Representative and Vice President of the Commission, Federica Mogherini, to draft an EU Global Strategy on foreign and security policy. Our workshop provided the chance to explore the content of this strategy review as illustrated by Nathalie Tocci, Deputy Director of the IAI and Special Advisor to the HRVP Federica Mogherini, pen-holder of the EU Global Strategy. MPs had the opportunity to discuss priorities and contribute to the debate on the EU’s global role.
European Union Institute for Security Studies-IAI joint conference on “Europe & Africa: A strategic approach”
17-18 February 2016, Paris
“Energy Union: from birth to maturity”, round table organized in cooperation with the College of Europe, Bruges
22 January 2016, Bruges
“Between power and rules: The geopolitics of the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership“. Conference organised in cooperation with the Centre for European Reform, London.
18 January 2016, Rome
“EU relations with Latin America. From social resilience to global governance“. Conference organised in cooperation with European Union Institute for Security Studies, Italian Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation, EU Global Strategy and Compagnia di San Paolo.
15 January 2016, Rome
“Civili in missione. L’esperienza italiana nelle missioni dell’Unione Europea“. Conference on the civilian missions, in cooperation with the Italian Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation.
17-18 December 2015, Rome
Conference on “A new European Neighbourhood Policy in a changing strategic environment“ in cooperation with the Polish Embassy in Rome.
9 December 2015, Rome
“The Energy Union: towards an effective European energy policy”: Conference with Maroš Šefčovič, European Commission Vice President for Energy Union.
4 December 2015, Rome
“Quale governo per l’Ue?“ Presentation of the volume What Form of Government for the European Union and the Eurozone? edited by Federico Fabbrini, Ernst Hirsch Ballin, Han Somsen (Hart Publishing, Oxford, 2015), Meeting within the cycle “The future of the European economy” in collaboration with the Center for Studies on Federalism.
4 December 2015, Rome
“Italy and the renegotiation of the UK’s EU membership”, Conference with Philipp Hammond, Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, followed by a roundtable with a panel of Italian and British experts.
25 November 2015, Rome
“The European Union and the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership: Managing Globalization?“, Conference with Pascal Lamy, President Emeritus of the Notre Europe-Jacque Delors Institute and former Director-General WTO, in collaboration with LUISS-School of Management e German Marshall Fund of the United States.
25 November 2015, Rome
“Challenges to European Security: A Transatlantic perspective”, Transatlantic Security Symposium (8th edition).
26 October 2015, Rome
“China-Europe relations and the role of Italy”, Conference organised in cooperation with T.wai, Turin, and the China Institutes of Contemporary International Relations (CICIR), Beijing, and with the support of the Italian Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the China Embassy in Italy.
22-23 October 2015, Rome
“Eurozone: getting back to growth?”; presentation of the book by Alberto Majocchi “Un piano per l’Europa” (Feltrinelli, 2015) in cooperation with Centro Studi sul Federalismo, Turin, and Aiace
20 October 2015, Rome
Conference with Mario Monti (former Italian Prime Minister and chairman of the EU High Level on Own Resources) on “Which resources for the European Union and Eurozone budget?”. In collaboration with the Center for Studies on Federalism.
19 October 2015, Turin
2–4 December 2016, Vienna University of Economics and Business, Vienna
Andreja Jaklič, Anže Burger, Marjan Svetličič and Iris Koleša from the Centre of International Relations (CIR), Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Ljubljana, presented CIR’s latest findings in international business (IB) at the EIBA 2016 conference on ‘Liabilities of Foreignness vs. the Value of Diversity: Conflict or Complement’.
The event that was organised by the European International Business Academy (EIBA) took place between 2 and 4 December 2016 and attracted 650 academics and researchers from all over the World to Vienna, Austria.
As part of the conference, elections of new EIBA board members also took place. Andreja Jaklič completed her 6-year term as a National Representative for Slovenia, during which she contributed to the increase of EIBA membership – especially by members from Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) (Hungary, Czech Republic and Russia); and collaborated in designing a newly launched format of academic cooperation in Europe though the EIBA-workshops. The first EIBA workshop that gathered IB scholars from the CEE region was organised on 12 October 2016 at the Corvinus University Budapest.
At the 2016 EIBA elections Anže Burger from CIR was elected as the new National Representative for Slovenia. His term will start in 2017, when the next EIBA conference will also be organised (the latter will take place in Milan, Italy, between 13 and 16 December).
Iris Koleša and Andreja Jaklič Awarded for an Outstanding Paper at the AIB-CEE Conference on International Business in Central and Eastern Europe
29 September–1 October 2016, Faculty of International Relations, University of Economics, Prague
Between 29 September and 1 October 2016, Andreja Jaklič from the Centre of International Relations took part at the 3rd Academy of International Business Central and Eastern Europe Chapter (AIB-CEE) Annual Conference in Prague. She participated in several debates on the developments in international business in the CEE region and presented a study on interorganizational network management for successful business internationalization, prepared together with Iris Koleša – also a Centre of International Relations member. The authors were awarded an acknowledgement for an outstanding paper by the conference organisers for the mentioned study. At the event, 44 papers were presented, among which ‘Slack, innovation and export intensity: Implications for SME’ by Patricia McDougall-Covin, Andrea Kiss, and Stephanie Fernhaber received the Best Conference Paper Award.
The conference entitled ‘Boosting competitiveness of Central Europe through digital economy’ was organized at the University of Economics in Prague, Czech Republic, and attracted over 80 academics to attend the panel discussions and sessions, which focused on issues such as new forms of businesses, role of digital economy in Central and Eastern Europe, digital entrepreneurship and possible impacts of digital economy on competitiveness and economic growth in Central and Eastern Europe, as well as on other key aspects of current trends in international business in the region.
Advantages and Challenges for the National Innovation System in Building a Competitive Industrial Strategy; Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Ljubljana
15 November 2016, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana
On 15 November 2016, the Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Ljubljana, hosted a Directorate-General for Neighbourhood and Enlargement Negotiations (DG NEAR) sponsored event on Europeanization of Western Balkans (WB). Nearly 30 participants, predominantly MA and BA students of European Studies and International Relations, but also interested policy makers, representatives of the national Chamber of Commerce and civil society representatives working in the field of innovation and industrial policy, cooperated in a 3,5-hour round table with a dynamic Q&A session.
Efka Heder, MA, Director, South East European Centre for Entrepreneurial Learning, gave the opening presentation and highlighted the potential and existing good practices in promoting entrepreneurial learning in the region of Western Balkans. Dr Peter Wostner, Government Office for Development and European Cohesion Policy, revealed recent development in industrial policy and implementation of smart specialisation in Slovenia. Dr Maja Bučar, Professor and Head of the Centre of International Relations, University of Ljubljana, illustrated the importance of the National Innovation System, reviewed recent developments in Europe and Slovenia and analysed the Slovenian experience in comparison with the Western Balkans’ experience.
The round table and debate was moderated by Professor Dr Andreja Jaklič.
On 23 and 24 March 2016 the first workshop took place in the ASKO Europa Stiftung in Saarbrücken in the new project “Alternative Europe!”. The project was launched by the ASKO Europa Stiftung (AES) and the Europäische Akademie Otzenhausen (EAO) in cooperation with the Institut für Europäische Politik (IEP). Given an increasing indifference towards the European project, particularly in younger generations and a general rise in Euroscepticism, the project does not only aim to identify and analyze current and future key issues of European integration but to deduce conclusions and connecting factors for political youth and adult education derived from these findings.
Fifteen participants from the EAO, the ASKO Europa Stiftung and the Young European Federalists (JEF) discussed with representatives of the IEP which megatrends of European integration are relevant for the education of the EAO and which ones will be. After a first plenary discussion, key issues were identified and collected in clusters, which were discussed in a World Café in working groups of three tables. However the main focus was generally on the discussion about the current state of education and the work of the EAO in particular. Among other things, it was discussed who can achieve the education and by which methods.
More information about the project can be found here.
The comprehensive training series on “Quality Infrastructure” for the Ukrainian Ministry of Economic Development and Trade (MEDT) was successfully continued in Kyiv by Anne Bercio, Project Leader at IEP. The training is targeted to foster institutional capacities of MEDT and all linked institutions dealing with technical regulations. Core topics of the second and third workshop were legal harmonisation with EU horizontal legislation on Accreditation and Market Surveillance, and conformity assessement in harmonized sectors of the EU single market.
The overall objective of the project is to strengthen MEDTs capacities for implementing the EU-Ukraine Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area/ Association Agreement. The trainings are implemented for Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ).
More information about the project can be found here.
The second workshop of IEP’s training series „Capacity Building for the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine (VRU)” was effectively implemented by Constanze Aka, project manager at IEP, on 4th and 5th of April, 2016, in Kyiv. The training was delivered to staffers of the European Integration committee as well as other VRU parliamentary committees. In this introductory workshop to legal harmonisation with the EU acquis the participants actively studied the obligations deriving of the Association Agreement between the EU and Ukraine, the EU legal order, and methods of legal harmonisation.
Main objective of the training series is to strengthen the capacities of the Verkhovna Rada to effectively contribute to the implementation of the Association Agreement.
The project is supported by the German Federal Foreign Office.
More information about the project can be found here.
Europa Union Deutschland (EUD) together with the Institut für Europäische Politik organised a citizen dialogue on “Europas Grenzen – Wir müssen reden!” on May 4 in Augsburg. The internal and external borders of the European Union were the core topic of the debate. Questions connected to the European border management and its current development were also discussed such as: Does the European Project meet its limits? Is the European capacity to act, its solidarity and the future prospect of the European Idea under threat?
At the dialogue “Europas Grenzen – Wir müssen reden!” citizens were enabled to discuss with politicians and experts about the future of Schengen, the freedom to travel, the even more fundamental freedom of movement, and also, how the migration crisis can be coped with on a European level. Will Europe become “Fortress Europe”? Are there viable alternatives? Do we need once again border controls, walls and fences? Or do these developments, in fact, jeopardise European solidarity and in the end maybe even our freedom? What about the achievements of free movement and open borders?
More information about the event can be found here.
DAGEFÖRDE, Mirjam. Concepts of Congruence and European’s evaluation of representation. A micro-level-analysis. Les Cahiers européens de Sciences Po n°03/2016.
SCHMIDT, Vivien A. The Crisis of European Union Studies seen From the US: EU Studies are ‘Widening’ and ‘Deepening’ even as EU Theories of Widening and Deepening are in crisis. Les Cahiers européens de Sciences Po n°02/2016.
FROMAGE, Diane. European Economic Governance and Parliamentary Involvement: Some Shortcomings of the Article 13 Conference and a Solution. Les Cahiers européens de Sciences Po n°01/2016
VITALE, Tommaso et BIORCIO, Roberto. Italia civile : Associazionismo, partecipazione e politica. Roma: Donzelli editore, 2016. 250 p. (Saggi. Storia e scienze sociali).
In French: Une profonde transformation politique et sociale a touché l’Italie au cours des vingt dernières années. Ce changement ne pouvait qu’impliquer le monde associatif, la partie la plus active et sensible de la société civile. Engagés dans de multiples activités, les réseaux associatifs favorisent la propagation de la culture démocratique et de la solidarité sociale en renforçant les liens entre les personnes et l’efficacité des politiques publiques. Jusqu’aux années 1990, leur action a été étroitement liée à celle des autres acteurs politiques, en premier lieu les partis. L’effondrement de ces derniers aurait dû également entraîner les associations. Au contraire, la sphère politique a considéré la société civile comme une ressource, voir même comme la principale ressource pour la refondation et l’innovation de la politique. Militants, dirigeants et cadres associatifs ont été cooptés dans la sphère politique; le monde associatif a été mis au centre du débat public. Dans un tout nouveau contexte, les responsabilités des associations ont augmenté, les poussant à aller au-delà de leur rôle traditionnel d’« école de la démocratie » pour suppléer, différemment, à certaines des tâches traditionnellement dévolues aux partis politiques et aux institutions publiques. Ce livre, résultat d’un travail collectif, reconstitue l’histoire de la participation des associations en Italie, de Tangentopoli à maintenant, s’intéressant plus particulièrement à la Lombardie, une zone très riche en réseaux associatifs. L’approche sociologique nous plonge dans les pensées et les comportements des citoyens engagés dans les groupes, les comités, les clubs, les centres communautaires, les syndicats, les mouvements et associations. Une attention particulière est accordée à l’inégalité des sexes, à la dimension religieuse et aux rapports des volontaires à la culture politique de la gauche. Les entretiens, sondages et observations recueillies au cours des deux décennies sont utilisés pour décrire le profil, les différences et les transformations des militants de tous les secteurs associatifs. Ce qui émerge est une histoire unique de la participation sociale, et de ce qu’elle a offert à la démocratie en Italie.
Editorships of Special Issues
BEZÈS, Philippe, CHIAPELLO, Eve, DESMAREZ, Pierre, (dir.). Dossier-débat le gouvernement par les indicateurs. Sociologie du Travail. novembre 2016, n° 58. (The Tension between Knowledge and Power through Government by Performance Indicators)
At national as well as at international level, it has become frequent to use indicators to set quantified goals and to monitor the evolution of public policies and bureaucracies. Social science research dealing with the development of performance measures is extensive and related to various intellectual traditions. Many consider this movement as a component of the neo-liberal turn and as an expression of the New Public Management. This symposium explores the tensions between the use of indicators and the exercise of power, underlining the ambivalence of this relationship, figures being both feared and desired. Three interdependent dimensions are differentiated to analyse the government by numbers: the challenges of knowledge, the logic of power and the types of publicisation that are linked to them. The four collected papers mainly deal with questions related to the monitoring of the results of public policies, discussed by authors belonging to various disciplines. They remind us that the definition of indicators plays a role in the manufacturing of political problems. They confirm how important it is to analyse in depth the way numbers are created and computed as well as the management and government devices in which they are embedded. Finally, they show that the government by indicators often triggers new forms of bureaucratisation.
Articles in Peer-reviewed Journals
BOISSEUIL, Clément. La rigenerazione urbana: welfare e workfare?: Uno studio comparativo tra Francia e Stati Uniti. Italian Journal of Social Policy / Rivista delle politiche sociali. September 2016, n° 1, p. 3-16.
In Francia e negli Stati Uniti il degrado del patrimonio immobiliare di edilizia pubblica e la concentrazione della povertà in alcuni quartieri popolari hanno promosso, a partire dall’inizio degli anni 2000, la progettazione di programmi di rigenerazione urbana di ampia portata. Una questione rimane ancora in sospeso: quale profilo dare a questi programmi urbani caratterizzati da finalità sociali? L’articolo si occupa dell’ambiguità che riguarda tali programmi, in particolare nei casi delle città di Parigi e Chicago, osservando l’emergere del workfare come modello principale delle iniziative osservate.
LE GALÈS, Patrick. Performance measurement as a policy instrument. Policy Studies. September 2016, vol 37, n° 6, p. 508-520.
The rise of government by indicators, by figures may reveal a new wave of rationalization organized by the state in the classic Weberian sense. Contemporary forms of government are marked by the rise of indicators, measures and new metrics to compare, certify, codify and evaluate. In many countries, performance measurement has become one of the symbols of the transformation of governance. The paper aims to show how performance indicators are a particular type of policy instrument that increases competitive pressure within societies even if that cannot be analysed only in terms of neoliberalism.
SAUGER, Nicolas et GROFMAN, Bernard. Partisan bias and redistricting in France. Electoral Studies. September 2016, n° 44, p. 388-396.
Decided by the executive, redistrictings in France have been claimed to have substantial partisan bias in favor of the right. We examine the evidence for this claim in terms of France’s left bloc versus right bloc politics, combining information from both the first and the second round of France’s two round electoral system.We also examine data at the constituency level to look at factors, such as malapportionment, that can affect bias. As France is characterized by a pattern of a limited number of redistrictings, population inequalities have grown in legislative constituencies between plans. Although the procedures used to draw constituency boundaries for the French Assembly are rather opaque, and under the control of political authorities, partisan bias appears as minuscule.
TOSI, Simone et VITALE, Tommaso. Modernizzazione, agire di comunità e azione collettiva: alle radici della political economy urbana. Stato e mercato. September 2016, vol 2/2016, n° 107, p. 241-272.
The tradition of Italian comparative political economy – thus of part of economic and political sociology – has distinctive elements that make it original respect to other national sociological traditions in Europe. We trace in Italian community studies of 50′ and 60′ a research tradition deeply inspiring that part of comparative political economy which has faced territories and cities. In these roots it is possible to find a way for inspiring innovative conceptualizations of the «local». Italian community studies have also cultivated an interesting reflection on the relationship between social research and the «political» dimension. It is still relevant, if not urgent. The article reconstructs the origins and the story of the Italian community studies of the 50’s and the 60’s and their legacy for large research programs developed since the 80s in the fields of economic and political sociology. Conclusion focuses on the crux of comparison showing how it constitutes a point of great importance to understand the specificity of the Italian tradition of community studies.
TOSI, Simone et VITALE, Tommaso. Vivere nella comunità locale? Una questione politica nella storia della sociologia urbana italiana. Sociologia urbana e rurale. September 2016, vol 39, n° 110, p. 42-55.
The moment of the Italian Community Studies, between the 50s and the 60s, has left a deep legacy. The article explores a specific dimension of this legacy: the way of thinking about the relationship between local studies and politics/policy. Based on six sections, it firstly explores the main meanings of politics and collective action developed in classic community studies. Then, it deepens the contribution of Danilo Dolci to the reflection on the relationship between community ties, politics and planning. The third section is about its main legacies in the sociology of the 80s. The following section investigates the main reasons that have led to a gap between urban studies and policy in Italy. The conclusion draws some lessons from the internal dialectics in Community Studies between analysis and proposals, between measurement and involvement, and it demonstrate the timeliness of Community Studies, even compared to the most recent debates on the functions of sociology.
HALPERN, Charlotte and PERSICO, Simon. Historical transport policy developments in 5 European capital-cities: do policies matter?: First WP4 technical report: [Technical Report] D4.1., 2016. 131 p.
As part of the CREATE project, the primary goal of WP4 is to analyse the historical ‘Transport Policy Evolution Cycle’ processes in Stage 3 cities, by identifying the qualitative factors that have enabled – or hindered – a shift from Stage 1 “urban congestion growth” to Stage 3“encouraging sustainable mobility and liveable cities” policies, and highlighting lessons to be learnt in order to speedup these processes in Stage 1 cities. This is the first WP4 technical report. It introduces the common analytic framework, methodology and data collection strategy that is applied in WP4. It also provides a first assessment of the spatial and chronological perimeter it targets, a brief mapping out of multi-level institutional and transport governance settings in the five Stage 3 cities, including a chronology of the shift from Stage 1 to Stage 3 and. Most of the work introduced in this report was done in close cooperation with partners across the five cities and with other WPs in the CREATE project. This first internal report is organized in five sections. First it discusses the relevance of the “Transport Policy Evolution Cycle” approach for understanding the long-term evolution of transport policy developments in European capital-cities. Second, drawing on the policy studies and urban governance literatures, it it introduces the common analytic framework for the work done as part of WP4. Third, it introduces the research design, methodology and data collection strategy applied in WP4. Fourth, it develops a short case-by-case analysis of the current state of urban sustainable mobility policies and governance across the five cases under scrutiny. Based on this first case-by case assessment of data availability in all five cities, it discusses next steps.
Annamária Artner: The world economy before and after Brexit. In: Köz-Gazdaság, Vol. 10, No. 3 (October 2016) pp. 25-42.
István Kőrösi: The renewability of the social market economy in the European Union. In: Kritische Zeiten, Vol. 7, Nos. 1-2, (January-July 2016) pp. 2-19.
István Kőrösi: Factors of the economic catching-up of Hungary, the countries of the Carpathian Basin and the Visegrád 4 – with special emphasis on human resources. In: Competitiveness in the Carpathian Basin (In Hungarian: Kárpát-medencei versenyképesség, 7. Báthory-Brassai konferencia – proceedings of the 7th Báthory-Brassai International Multidisciplinary Conference) Vol. 1, pp 504-521.
Judit Ricz, Sándor Gyula Nagy: The economic crisis in Brasil – situation, causes and way outs. (A brazil gazdasági válság – helyzetkép, okok és kiutak) In: Külügyi Szemle Vol 15, No 3 (Autumn 2016) pp. 94-120. (In Hungarian in ‘Foreign Affairs.’
Erzsébet N. Rózsa at al: In the framework of the H2020 MENARA project the first study was published under the title of “Re-conceptualizing orders in the MENA Region – The analytical framework of the MENARA project”
Rózsa Erzsébet, Arany Anett, Szalai Máté: Az Iszlám Állam kalifátusa. Az átalakuló Közel-Kelet, Osiris-KKI, Budapest, 2016 (A book in Hungarian on the Islamic State and the transformation of the Middle East)
Mihály Simai: European integration and global realities – or, has the European dream come to an end? In. Köz-Gazdaság, Vol. 10, No. 3 (October 2016) pp. 241-257.
Miklós Somai, Attila Jámbor, Sándor Kovács: 10 years of EU membership – Diverging performances in new member states agriculture. In: Ekonomicky Casopis/Journal of Economics Vol. 64, Nos. 5-6.
Andrea Szalavetz: Chronicle of a revolution foretold in Hungary – Industry 4.0 technologies and manufacturing subsidiaries (Egy előre bejelentett forradalom krónikája Magyarországon – Ipar 4.0-technológiák és a hazai feldolgozóipari leányvállalatok) In: Külgazdaság Vol. 60, No. 9-10, pp. 28-48. (In Hungarian in ‘Foreign Economy’)
Tamás Szigetvári:The changing role of state in the Turkish economy. (Az állam átalakuló szerepe a török gazdaságban) In: Külgazdaság Vol 60, No. 9-10, pp. 49-70. (In Hungarian in ‘Foreign Economy)
Tamás Szigetvári: Global inequality and international development policy in the mirror of Catholic social education. In: Köz-Gazdaság Vol. 11, No. 4, (November 2016) pp. 143-156
Norbert Szijártó: The effects of exchange rate regime choice on macroeconomic policies – a comparison of three periphery regions – the case of the Baltic, Iberian and Visegrad countries. (Az árfolyamrendszer választásának makrogazdasági sajátosságai az Európai Unió három régiójában – A balti, az ibériai és a visegrádi államok esete), Budapest: MTA KRTK Világgazdasági Intézet, 2016. 54 p. (VGI Műhelytanulmányok: 118= IWE Workshop Studies No. 118) (ISBN 978-615-5594-65-6) (In Hungarian)
Ágnes Szunomár, Agnieszka McCaleb: Comparing Chinese, Japanese and South Korean FDI in Central and Eastern Europe. In: Joanna Wardega (ed.) China-Central and Eastern Europe cross-cultural dialogue: society, business, education in transition. Jagiellonian University Press, Krakow, 2016. pp. 199-212.
Ágnes Szunomár, Tamás Matura: Perceptions of China among Central and Eastern European university students. In: Joanna Wardega (ed.) China-Central and Eastern Europe cross-cultural dialogue: society, business, education in transition. Jagiellonian University Press, Krakow, 2016. pp. 103-120.
Gábor Túry: Internationalisation of Volkswagen’s activities, transformation of the spatial pattern of production from the sixties to the present day. In: Területi Statisztika, 2016, 56(6): 591–618
IWE Working Papers:
September 2016 l
Streaming of the debate “Poussée des droites extrêmes en Europe : partout, les mêmes ingrédients ?” organized by Sciences Po, CEE and Revue Projet
In French: Les idées d’extrême droite ne cessent de progresser, dans les discours et dans les urnes. En France, le Front national perce y compris parmi les jeunes, les fonctionnaires, les femmes, les catholiques, voire chez les enfants d’immigrés, des catégories de population que l’on croyait, jusqu’ici, plus hermétiques. Le phénomène interroge.
Pour beaucoup, ce vote est délibérément transgressif. Qui n’a jamais éprouvé de colère devant l’hypocrisie de certains responsables politiques ? Qui ne s’est jamais senti moqué, voire trahi par le fossé entre les paroles et les actes ? Qui n’a jamais été tenté par une forme de désespérance quand les majorités successives semblent impuissantes à proposer un autre cap ? Quand ces sentiments rencontrent une réalité marquée par l’inquiétude quant à l’avenir des enfants, la précarisation du travail et des liens sociaux, la raréfaction des services publics de proximité, comment s’étonner qu’ils se muent en ressentiment envers des élites qui semblent sourdes à leurs cris ? Alors on ne vote pas. Ou, sans même souhaiter sa victoire, on vote FN, en forme de bras d’honneur.
December 9, 2016
This talk will consider the factors behind Britain’s vote to leave the EU in both the long- and the short-term. It will try understand how Brexit happened, how Brexit was allowed to happen, its wider implications (both political and economic) and the seismic changes in and through British politics is being remade. It will explain how the referendum revealed the new fault lines of British politics – in polarization that is being driven by uneven patterns of economic development. It will consider the substantial challenges facing the May Government, and pressures on the British state, economy and democracy that will continue long after Article 50 is triggered.
September 29, 2016
Debate « Après le discours sur l’état de l’Union du Président Juncker. Quel avenir pour l’Europe ? »
Speaker: Pierre Moscovici, Commissioner for Economic and Financial Affairs, Taxation and Customs
– End-year evaluation and short-term prospects of the European integration (with Péter Balázs, former EU-Commissioner and minister of foreign affairs, Péter Tálas and László Valki), 28 January 2014
– Utilization of EU transfers in Hungary (Péter Heil), 25 February 2014
– The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (Lutz Göllner from the European Commission and Zsolt Becsey), 3 March 2014
– Critical assessment of the Eastern Partnership (Tamás Szigetvári), 18 March 2014
– Hungary and the European Union: evaluation of one decade of membership and personal thoughts about the future of the Union (András Inotai), 15 April 2014
IWE workshop on welfare state models presented by Ágnes Orosz, followed by a discussion (in Hungarian), 9 January 2014
IWE workshop on youth unemployment and basic income presented by Annamária Artner, followed by a discussion (in Hungarian), 6 February 2014
Russia’s strategy in international politics and the global economy: Russia’s relations with the United States (Mihály Simai), with China (Ágnes Szunomár) and energy issues (Csaba Weiner), 12 March 2014
IWE special workshop on Hungary’s EU membership: multiannual financial framework (Miklós Somai), comparative analysis of membership of the Visegrad countries (Krisztina Vida) and of the Baltic States (Sándor Meisel), crisis management and EMU (Margit Rácz), 27 March 2014
András Inotai’s lecture on “Ungarn, die Europaeische Union und Deutschland”, conference linked to the prize provided to András Inotai by the Thyssen-Stiftung in October 2013, 16 January 2014, Cologne
Tamás Novák on “Implications of TTIP on global economic integration of Central and Eastern Europe” presentation given at the conference entitled: “Before and After the TTIP: The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership between the European Union and the United States”, 28 February 2014, Conference at the University of Miami
András Inotai on “Alternative against austerity: a future-oriented strategy for Europe” organized by Progressive Economic Initiative of the Socialists and Democrats in the European Parliament, 6 March 2014, Brussels, round table discussion
Tamás Novák on “Impact of the European Union Crisis on V4 Countries: Old and New Challenges”, 26 March 2014, Annual Conference of the International Studies Association, Toronto
XVth April International Academic Conference on Economic and Social Development, Csaba Weiner on “The Contest for Gas Resources and Markets in the Post-Soviet space: Dependence and Diversification”, Moscow, 2 April 2014
András Inotai on “The neighbourhood: Ukraine, the EU and the Russian problem” International conference on Progressive Renaissance for Europe, organized by FEPS and Progressive Economic Studies, 4 April 2014, Brussels, round table discussion
András Inotai on “What growth and employment strategies for Europe?” (same conference and organizers as above), 4 April 2014, Brussels, round table discussion
The Trans European Policy Studies Association (TEPSA) is the first transeuropean research network. It consists of leading research institutes in the field of European affairs throughout Europe, with … [Read More...]
TEPSA benefits from the support of the European Commission